> [djh] > Goodness Arlo, I've said multiple times even directly to you that Marsha > makes the SOM=intellect mistake. My very last post to you said exactly this… > > [Arlo] > Right, okay, but I think the mistake is that equate this with "values DQ". In > a pure sense, "valuing DQ", I suppose, would be something like sitting on top > the mountain and dissolving all patterns into the moment of pure awareness. I > can get that. Tthat's fine. And I can respect that approach. But that is NOT > what Marsha is doing. Its not like you're stumbling onto a mystic on that > mountaintop and asking her why she doesn't value 'static patterns'. If you > really want to get at what Marsha values, you have to start looking at why > she is here instead of up on that mountain. What 'static patterns' bring her > here, which are the 'static patterns' she is valuing? > > Anyway, like I said, you're never gonna kick that football. I appreciate you > feel if you keep at it you might, I think many have felt that way at one > point over the past many years. But you won't. And the reason for that is the > nature of the static patterns that bring her here.
[djh] Right, but folks can wrongly value DQ - thinking they're alluding to DQ - but are actually destroying it with sq. As I said to dmb I think she's here, like a Mystic, to point us to DQ. She want us to 'see' that DQ is the creator of all things.. "What good is an expanded rationality if it still demonstrates aggressiveness and uses character assassination to achieve its ends: same old, same old. It doesn't fit. I think some have skipped moving through the 180-degree point, which is not an intellectual exercise." Trouble is, she doesn't 'see' clearly the difference between Dynamic Quality and static quality herself. Otherwise, for instance, she would see the static value of the assumption that things exist before we experience them.. "[djh] Can you ever see the value of thinking about static quality and making the assumption that things exist before we think about them? [Marsha] There might be good reasons in science to pretend [make an assumption]." And she wouldn't see it necessary to talk about static patterns as 'ever-changing'. Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org/md/archives.html
