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

[ian glendinning]

DMB,

What is interesting about this response is that it refers only to the
final "incidental" paragraph in my mail, not those that I said were
the main point ...

There are two "main points" left hanging ...

(1) the idea of treating those involved in discussion as "opponents".
(2) the $64,000 question (in the wiki thread).

(And, incidentally, clearly the reason for pointing out things that I
know you and Ant and other old hands already know, is that there are
other people reading the threads too.)

Ian

On 8/14/06, david buchanan <dmbuchanan at hotmail.com> wrote:
> Ian said to dmb:
> Interestingly since starting this response I see Case has also chimed in
> with the point I was actually making as politely as I could with someone I
> already agreed with,  that social contexts do not necessarily exclude the
> mystical - far from it. There a good and bad quality social contexts as I
> know both you and Ant already know. Sorry if it offends for me to point that
> out.
>
> dmb says:
> I'm not offended. I'm just frustrated. Here you have done it again. Ant did
> not say that social contexts necessarily exclude the mystical. Once again
> you are disputing a point nobody made. And what makes it even more
> frustrating is that you have failed to grapple with the point that is being
> made. If Ant and I already know, then what's the point of saying it?
>
> As to the actual point... Do you recall the description of mysticism that I
> took from the Oxford Companion to Philosophy the other day? Let me repeat
> and focus on the relevant sentence from that. It says, "Strongly monistic
> mysticism, however, is harder to square with a Christian view, and when such
> mystics have themselves been Christians they have often been suspected of
> heresy."
>
> Think about that for a minute. Heresy. Blasphemy. And then think about the
> MOQ's emphasis on the role of contratians in the evolutionary process. Think
> about Pirsig's central criticisms of SOM, especially the way it excludes
> mysticism from the world. The capitalists and the socialist didn't see it.
> Scientific materialism doesn't see it. The positivists ruled it out and the
> neo-pragmatists think its just a language game or whatever. See, the MOQ is
> designed to re-incorporate an area of human for which Western culture has a
> huge blind spot. I think this is the point. This is why "seeing for
> yourself" is so unlikely so long as we adhere to traditional religion in the
> West. This is why theism is different from mysticism, because traditionally
> the theists burn them at the stake.
>
> And I think this is why this point is so important in understanding the MOQ.
> The MOQ is supposed to address this blind spot so as to get rid of it. You
> know, it all began back in that teepee. "..current research and discussion
> are clouded by political and social issues". I mean, Lila spends some time
> talking about the cultural filters, the ones that filters some things OUT.
> That's what Jung was getting at when he said that religion forestalls
> experience. See, theistic Christianity basically prohibits it. The Church
> doesn't kill people over it anymore, thank God, but its still unlikely to
> help people with it.
>
> Now, Ian, please. If you're going to distort this point so as to turn it
> into some kind of black and white absolutism, then please don't bother to
> respond at all. That's just a pointless waste of time. If you are willing to
> respond to what I've actually said, however, then I'd be thrilled to chat
> about it. Then we'd be having a real conversation on the actual topic.
>
> Thanks.
> dmb
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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/
>