Arlo said to Ian:
What dogma? I think DMB has been nothing but consistent and accurate in
representing Pirsig's metaphysics. Give me an example of something 'better'
that you feel DMB's 'dogma' has excluded?
dmb says:
Thanks, Arlo. But getting back to the topic, there's a paper that discusses
On Oct 21, 2013, at 7:02 PM, ARLO JAMES BENSINGER JR ajb...@psu.edu wrote:
[Ian]
Problems with dmb dogma dominated MD more like.
[Arlo]
What dogma? I think DMB has been nothing but consistent and accurate in
representing Pirsig's metaphysics. Give me an example of something 'better'
David Morey said:
If anyone wants to follow a genuinely open exploration of non-dualist thinking
in a broader and better connected tradition I recommend Speculative Realism,
shame really, the MOQ deserves better.
Arlo replied:
This is an interesting statement. What does the MOQ deserves
All,
The idea of I and Consciousness as entities in the sense of
objective existence in an ontology, is clearly misguided for any of us
who already reject SOMism. In their noun sense just a figure of
speech sure, but from a process, functional potentiality sense, they
are far more than a figure of
Ian said to All:
The idea of I and Consciousness as entities in the sense of objective
existence in an ontology, is clearly misguided for any of us who already reject
SOMism.
dmb says:
Sadly, it seems that some people don't really understand what it means to
reject SOM. David Morey's recent
Hi all
I'd just like to warn anyone who can think for themselves to ignore DMB's silly
and dogmatic SOM red flag waving, the world of SOM criticism is clearly much
wider than DMB's rather limited reading list implies, and this reactionary
scare mongering will see the MOQ disappear into the
Yes, the only light at the end of the tunnel is that we may finally be
seeing the death throws of DMB's anti-personnel-rhetoric - with luck,
as you say.
Ian
On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 6:16 PM, David Morey david...@blueyonder.co.uk wrote:
Hi all
I'd just like to warn anyone who can think for
Hi Ian
Surely not, if DMB is anything he is clearly indestructible, he can out drum
the duracell bunny any day, I'll give him that, no doubt about it! DMB last man
standing, you got to laugh, but it is quite some energy he has, although a
lot of it is cut and paste bassed, but he has the
Hi David M and All,
In DQ/SQ metaphysics there are two descriptions for understanding reality
definable/indefinable DQ/SQ. For reality I do not understand an existential
distinction between entity and function? Being and Cause??
Joe
On 10/21/13 10:16 AM, David Morey david...@blueyonder.co.uk
It seems that Hagen could just as well be borrowing this critique of the
Cartesian thinker from William James.
‘‘If we could say in English ‘it thinks,’ as we say ‘it rains’ or ‘it blows,’
we should be stating the fact most simply and with the minimum of assumption.’’
(James, 1890, p. 220)
[DM]
If anyone wants to follow a genuinely open exploration of non-dualist thinking
in a broader and better connected tradition I recommend Speculative Realism,
shame really, the MOQ deserves better.
[Arlo]
This is an interesting statement. What does the MOQ deserves better mean? Are
you
dmb,
You think? You wrote But I think Hagen is borrowing this criticism from
Nietzsche. As Wiki says Hagen has not borrowed his criticism from
Nietzsche. Steve Hagen's book has no mention of William James or Nietzsche in
either the bibliography or the index. You think? The last
Arlo,
Problems with the MoQ?
Nah, keep up.
Problems with dmb dogma dominated MD more like. Not alternatives to more
complementary views of, views that fill in gaps for the open minded.
Ian
On 21 Oct 2013 21:45, ARLO JAMES BENSINGER JR ajb...@psu.edu wrote:
[DM]
If anyone wants to follow a
[Ian]
Problems with the MoQ?
Nah, keep up.
[Arlo]
Problems with the MOQ was DM's phrase (my view and why it reveals problems
in the MOQ), Ian, not mine. Keep up.
[Ian]
Problems with dmb dogma dominated MD more like.
[Arlo]
What dogma? I think DMB has been nothing but consistent and accurate in
Hi David B and All,
Entity and function are strange bedfellows
On 10/18/13 9:01 AM, david buchanan dmbucha...@hotmail.com wrote:
David quotes Wiliam James:
To deny plumply that consciousness exists seems so absurd on the face of it
for undeniably thoughts do exist that I fear some
I think, therefore I am? The most famous certainty isn't at all certain.
The absurdity of this assertion becomes clearer once we switch subjects. We’ve
all used the common expression “It’s raining.” But would we say, “It is
raining, therefore it is”? What is raining? Do we suppose there is
16 matches
Mail list logo
