Dan said,
... notice how skillfully Robert Pirsig uses praise ...
... we could learn a great deal from this here...
... God knows I am as guilty as the next person in condemning and criticizing.
... Just something to consider, that's all.
As I keep saying ...
peace, love and understanding ain't
Marsha:
I hope you are not implying that the praises were falsely
presented to lessen the impact. That would be one way
to pattern (interpret) the statement. I still see Platt and Bo
as brilliant. I wonder if Mr. Pirsig has thought any poster
100% correct. If not, his same statement of
Sorry everyone my atrocious typing edition skills presented the Textbook
quote incorrectly.
Dave,
I've offered quotes on Buddhism from the MoQ Textbook. Maybe you think
Anthony is confused and nihilistic? In the MoQ Textbook Anthony writes that
the fundamental nature of the static
Hi Mark,
Don't know of KBA, because without TV there is less BS.
Marsha
On Jul 21, 2011, at 11:21 PM, 118 wrote:
Hi Marsha,
K.B.A. was accused of killing her child in Florida. The Jury found
her innocent. Now her defense lawyer is receiving death threats.
Need I say more?
Woof!
Mark
On Jul 22, 2011, at 4:31 AM, MarshaV val...@att.net wrote:
Or neither accept God, nor deny God, so MU.
Marsha
On Jul 21, 2011, at 11:26 PM, 118 wrote:
Quality knows that God has never had any better friends than Platt and
Bo. Any atheist religion must believe in
Hi Marsha
Before you dive into the deep. Have you ever read this? It's an excerpt from a
letter written by RMP to Anthony McWatt, March 23, 1997:
...
The MOQ is in agreement with the Buddhist law of Dependent Origination and
regards this law as an excellent explanation of how Dynamic Quality
J-A,
And? That was 1996. Published in 2005, in the Textbook, Anthony writes that
the fundamental nature of the static is the Dynamic: Moreover, Nagarjuna
(1966, p.251) shares Pirsig’s perception that the indeterminate (or Dynamic) is
the fundamental nature of the conditioned (or static).
J-A,
On Jul 22, 2011, at 10:23 AM, Jan-Anders Andersson wrote:
Hi Marsha
Before you dive into the deep. Have you ever read this? It's an excerpt from
a letter written by RMP to Anthony McWatt, March 23, 1997:
...
The MOQ is in agreement with the Buddhist law of Dependent Origination
Did the Wright brother pursue flight because of suffering? I don't think so...
On Jul 22, 2011, at 10:46 AM, MarshaV wrote:
J-A,
On Jul 22, 2011, at 10:23 AM, Jan-Anders Andersson wrote:
Hi Marsha
Before you dive into the deep. Have you ever read this? It's an excerpt from
a
Sometimes it is good just to put the top down on that cart and just FLY!!!
On Jul 22, 2011, at 10:49 AM, MarshaV wrote:
Did the Wright brother pursue flight because of suffering? I don't think
so...
On Jul 22, 2011, at 10:46 AM, MarshaV wrote:
J-A,
On Jul 22, 2011, at
Hi Dan,
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 11:48 PM, Dan Glover daneglo...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello everyone
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 8:37 PM, Steven Peterson
peterson.st...@gmail.com wrote:
LC annotation 126. God knows, the MOQ has never had two better
friends than Bo and Platt.
Dan:
Yes... notice
Hello everyone
On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 11:26 AM, Steven Peterson
peterson.st...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Dan,
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 11:48 PM, Dan Glover daneglo...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello everyone
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 8:37 PM, Steven Peterson
peterson.st...@gmail.com wrote:
LC annotation
J-A to Marsha:
The Buddhists however, say that the source of patterns is ignorance, whereas the MOQ says
the source of the patterns is the nothingness of Dynamic Quality.
When it is said that the static patterns arise from Dynamic Quality the
non-dualistic view of the world so characteristic
Hello everyone
On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 4:12 AM, MarshaV val...@att.net wrote:
Marsha:
I hope you are not implying that the praises were falsely
presented to lessen the impact.
Dan:
Did I say that?
Marsha:
That would be one way
to pattern (interpret) the statement.
Dan:
If that is how
Hello Dan,
On Jul 22, 2011, at 2:06 PM, Dan Glover wrote:
Hello everyone
On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 4:12 AM, MarshaV val...@att.net wrote:
Marsha:
I hope you are not implying that the praises were falsely
presented to lessen the impact.
Dan:
Did I say that?
Marsha:
No, and I wrote
Hello everyone
On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 12:17 PM, MarshaV val...@att.net wrote:
Hello Dan,
On Jul 22, 2011, at 2:06 PM, Dan Glover wrote:
Hello everyone
On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 4:12 AM, MarshaV val...@att.net wrote:
Marsha:
I hope you are not implying that the praises were falsely
dmb says to Dan:
I'm asking about the notion you've been hammering upon: the notion that it is
our behavior that is without choice, and not us. What is the difference between
our behavior being without choice and us being without choice. How is that NOT
the same thing? The question was, if our
Yes, it's a very effective rhetorical technique. God knows the knife slides in
so much easier if you butter them up first.
Just something to laugh at, that's all.
Dan comments:
Really, we could learn a great deal from this here. And God (it is
meant as a literary device, not an actual
Well, I'm thankful for Al, and lots of other giants of old, but when I look
around me today, at the kind of society we have and the kinds of individuals
it produces - the next Einsteins, supposedly, I'm not surprised that the MoQ
is not more popular. Thus my duh.
Lady Gaga trumps Robert M.
Has anyone heard of Cognitive Theoretic Model of the Universe, that is,
CTMU? Developed by Chris Langan (according to some, the smartest man in
America with regards to IQ), it features a concept called telic
recursion, which is quite similar to Quality in MOQ. CTMU features the
supertautology,
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 10:23 PM, 118 ununocti...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi John,
Hi Mark.
Now you know I care about you, or at least you do now.
I feel like your a caring guy and an MoQ friend of mine, yes.
I don't think
your lifestyle is very healthy at present. I would suggest you stop
All interested MOQers:
Dave T said:
...The MoQ is Zen in a Pendleton blanket. Most, not all, but most of the
confusion in the MoQ is the confusion with and within Buddhism. The MoQ it is
an attempt by a Westerner with a tiny amount of Eastern experience and smidgen
of Zen experience to
John said to Ian:
Oh yeah, you wanna know what's so funny about peace, love and understanding? Is
that they are so necessary for existence, and yet so shunned in practice.
Hilarious!
dmb says:
Elvis expresses a fine sentiment. The problem is that you're invoking it here,
in a discussion
Evenin', dave.
On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 7:00 PM, david buchanan dmbucha...@hotmail.comwrote:
John said to Ian:
Oh yeah, you wanna know what's so funny about peace, love and
understanding? Is that they are so necessary for existence, and yet so
shunned in practice. Hilarious!
dmb says:
Hi J-A,
You ask a good question. I like good questions
Is there a way, is it possible to make classic and romantic oriented people
to understand each other?
I think yes. Two things are necessary - first, realization. When classic
people understand that romantic people think differently,
Dmb,
Interesting because James's radical empiricism and pragmatism turns into
ethical relativism without the evolutionary help of the four levels. It seems
it was evolutionary progress that James needed too. Remember the discussion
about the holocaust producing satisfaction for the Nazis?
Hello everyone
On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 5:33 PM, david buchanan dmbucha...@hotmail.com wrote:
Yes, it's a very effective rhetorical technique.
Dan:
Well, Dave... it is a little more than an effective rhetorical
technique. It is grounded in the science of influence. And whether you
care to
On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 4:30 PM, david buchanan dmbucha...@hotmail.com wrote:
dmb says to Dan:
I'm asking about the notion you've been hammering upon: the notion that it is
our behavior that is without choice, and not us. What is the difference
between our behavior being without choice and
Hello everyone
On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 7:00 PM, david buchanan dmbucha...@hotmail.com wrote:
John said to Ian:
Oh yeah, you wanna know what's so funny about peace, love and understanding?
Is that they are so necessary for existence, and yet so shunned in practice.
Hilarious!
dmb says:
29 matches
Mail list logo
