Chuck, That's exactly my point. -x -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chuck Sent: Monday, March 19, 2007 12:34 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [MD] Dawkins a Materialist (is watching?) primary objectivity,allow me to interject
Plain and simple, as you say, there is absolutely no reason that objective reality must be primary to discuss it. Primary means (as I understand it) coming first. That there is a objective part to our reality allows us to discuss various "real" things (including subjective ones) is not in question. We don't question that there is also a subjective part to our experiences. But objectivity being primary is an illusion that non-dualist are trying to expose. For those that understand ZMM, Quality is primary, and sbjects and objects come after. This does nothing except change where you place objects in terms of your reality, so that you can better integrate all the things that confound those who rely exclusively on "objectivity". Halfway through this, I realised that I was composing a sort of "primer" on ZMM and that for anyone who read and understand it, this whole paragraph is redundant. I suggest reading the book. Check me out! --------------------------------- Don't get soaked. Take a quick peek at the forecast with theYahoo! Search weather shortcut. 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.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/ 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.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
