Ron,

I asked you how you were defining 'fact'.  It is for you to answer. It is you 
who are squirming away.  Analogy:  
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Analogy?s=t
 
I think by 'value rigidity' RMP means, in the Buddhist sense, attachment.  
 
 
Marsha
 





> On Dec 6, 2013, at 8:15 AM, Ron Kulp <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Marsha,
> It is drawn from the experience of 
> Reading the pirsig quote , exactly
> What do you suppose RMP means 
> When he uses the term "fact"?
> You are getting ridiculous trying to squirm away from the point of the
> Quote, what do you think pirsig meant by the monkey analogy?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On Dec 6, 2013, at 7:12 AM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Ron,
>> 
>> And?  Was the analogy of the monkey with its hand caught in the coconut 
>> drawn from any kind of fact that you experienced?  How are you defining a 
>> fact and is the interpretation of facts subject to cognitive biases (stale, 
>> confusing, static, intellectual attachments to the past).   I think it best 
>> to consider static patterns of value  (stuff in the encyclopedia) as 
>> hypothetical.  Of course the requires paying attention.  
>> 
>> Marsha
>> 
>> 
>>> On Dec 6, 2013, at 6:00 AM, Ron Kulp <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Marsha ,
>>> Of course the analogy is to
>>> Get a point across, that facts
>>> Exist in experience , facts are
>>> Not hypotheses. 
>>> 
>>> The hypothetical story was used
>>> To illustrate a point RMP was
>>> Making about value rigidityThere is a fact this monkey should know: if he 
>>> opens his hand he's free. But how is he going to discover this fact? By 
>>> removing the value rigidity that rates rice above freedom. How is he going 
>>> to do that? Well, he should somehow try to slow down deliberately and go 
>>> over ground that he has been over before and see if things he thought were 
>>> important really were important 
>>> 
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>> 
>>>> On Dec 5, 2013, at 8:44 PM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Ron,
>>>> 
>>>> Okay, low value is low value, but how is using the monkey trap analogy not 
>>>> a hypothetical?  
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Marsha 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> On Dec 5, 2013, at 2:52 PM, Ron Kulp <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Using the monkey trAp analogy,
>>>>> It would seem (to me) that there
>>>>> Is nothing hypothetical about being
>>>>> In a low quality environment/situation.
>>>>> The bias lies in the value rigidity.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Dec 5, 2013, at 1:22 PM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Hypothetical is a good approach, because as pattern recognition 
>>>>>> entities, we are susceptible to a HUGE list of cognitive biases:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 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
> 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
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

Reply via email to