[MD] New Model Army, Mystic(DQ) Experience, and Religion (SQ) as Power

[ian glendinning]

BTW dmb,

Using the words you do here ..

"pre-rational, rational and post-rational"
(I was simply using GOF-Rational to indicate the mid range here - what
most people would consider rational.)

Again, not intending to argue with you, far from it, but just pointing
out an angle ... being critial of people who find the "gooey stuff"
comforting is one thing, but surely the point is that the
post-rational ("new-rational" as my blog posted on every single page
since 5 years ago, incidentally) recognises this reality and
incorporates the qualitative / spiritual aspects (Quality / Harmony,
whatever) into a holistic whole, a better kind of rationality ...
whether we prefer Pirsig or Wilber or whoever ...

Onward and upward, accentuate the positive, etc :-)
Ian

On 8/7/06, david buchanan <dmbuchanan at hotmail.com> wrote:
> Case said:
> I agree with the part about no separate intelligences and no "supernatural"
> but rationality and logic are what take us out of the gooey emotional,
> feeling talk that spirituality ultimately leads to. rationality
> should not surplant emotion but when the two work in Harmony... ah, there is
> that word again.
>
> dmb says:
> Gooey emotional feeling talk. Yea, that's exactly what I was complaining
> about when one of the posters defended his "faith" because of the emotional
> satisfaction it provides. I could go on all day about how destructive this
> can be for individuals and societies alike. In short, this sort of "faith"
> is a kind of backward regression into PRE-rational thinking and is
> completely different than the TRANS-rational thinking. Again following
> Wilber, confusing the former with the latter is called "the pre/trans
> fallacy" and there is quite a lot of it going around in our time. This
> confusion plays a role in just about every reactionary movement in recent
> history. Seen this way, fascism and fundamentalism and neo-paganism are all
> regressive steps backward. Seen this way, the mystical experience is not
> just a "feeling" but more like a realization, an epiphany, a great big "ah
> ha!" moment, a peak experience or something more along those lines.
>
> And yes, something like harmony is the goal. I think the idea in Wilber's
> work and in the MOQ is that we need to integrate these various levels so
> that they aren't in conflict with one another. Or, when they are in
> conflict, we can at least have some reasonable way to distinquish which
> level of values is to take precedence.
>
> And I have to say that this is basically the difference between traditional
> theism on the one hand and philosophical mysticism on the other. One is
> pre-rational while the other is post-rational. And since both are NOT
> rational, people get confused and think they are the same. This confusion is
> pretty much the definition of tragedy.
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE!
> http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
>
> 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/
>