[MD] Ham & swiss cheese

[Dan Glover]

Hello everyone

>From: Heather Perella <spiritualadirondack at yahoo.com>
>Reply-To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
>To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
>Subject: Re: [MD] Ham & swiss cheese
>Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2006 14:15:13 -0800 (PST)
>
>Hello Dan and all others on the MOQ,
>
>      I definitely like the quote you had, "Action is
>thy duty, reward not thy concern." (Bhagavad Gita)
>Has the smell of Wisdom.

I like it very much too.

>
>      You know want, when you think about it, at least
>for me, it is tough to think whatever viewpoint we
>have, in the end, doesn't matter because we are all
>heading in the same direction.  Tough only because of
>the practice, not in the agreement, because I notice a
>valuable understanding in such an expression.  As I
>quote from you, "I think to rid oneself of all
>viewpoints simply means to come to the realization
>that despite all of us being on different paths, we're
>all heading the same way."  I take this to mean that
>we do each have viewpoints, but once we realize
>actually what you said, then we rid the barriers and
>don't stiffened up to each other varying viewpoint.
>Is that what you mean?

No. Well, not in my case. A more evolved person might be able to say so 
however. What I mean is, it seems to me that when a person is on the brink 
of death the best course of action is to pick a path and stick to it since 
we're going to get there in the end anyway. Any path suffices. Okay, try 
this: there's a zen story about a man who is out for a walk one fine day 
when what does he come across but a hungry tiger! Running, the man soon 
comes to a sheer cliff. Looking back, he sees the tiger coming closer. He is 
trapped! Looking over the edge of the cliff, the man sees a second tiger 
down below looking up, waiting. Seeing a vine hanging over the edge of the 
cliff, the man eases himself down and hangs perilously between the two 
tigers. The man looks up to see two mice, a black one and a white one, 
chewing carefully and purposely at the vine he is clutching. He reaches out 
and plucks a strawberry that is growing on side of the cliff, popping it 
into his mouth. How good it tastes!

That is close to what I mean. I think.

>This seems to fit in with what
>Ham was trying to argue in "Unreality of Equality",
>yet, he was being hard nosed about differing
>viewpoints to the extent that we don't even agree (or
>at least it seemed that way).  Yet, I believe that we
>could all have differing viewpoints and still agree.
>Why?  Because our different inputs come from different
>angles upon a topic and our agreement provides the
>static quality while our creative different viewpoints
>provide the dynamic quality.

No what I'm saying doesn't fit at all with that. It is my fault for not 
being more specific. We each have a distinct outlook on reality filtered 
through our own unique experiences, yes. In that respect, there's no 
possible way for agreement. None. You seem to be assuming the topic is "out 
there" for all to experience. The MOQ would seem to say that is a high 
Quality outlook but there is no way for anyone to know that for certain. You 
can't take a topic and put it under a microscope to look at and examine. It 
exists as a social pattern of value.

>Ham brings up good
>points on inequality, and the points on too much
>government is valid.

So say you. It's a bullshit point, imo. No matter though.

>Yet, that leads right into my
>argument that we are subjected to work and buy - a
>lot- instead of this culture valuing more quality time
>with the family, neighbors, the universe in thoughtful
>reflection, more control in our hands as to what we
>want to have materially, yet, here again we need the
>time for craftiness, I am talking about a more
>convivial society where we have the quality
>opportunity to make more decisions in our lives, and
>etc...

You can have that now, if you want it. You have to want it though. If you do 
not have quality time with your family, etc., it is on account of your own 
actions, my friend. No one elses. No excuses allowed.

>      Yet, the large corporations have their hands in
>sync with the politicians in big government.  So we
>really has an advantage when the big government Ham
>argues against, is in bed with the big 'king of the
>hill' corporations that Ham finds only natural in a
>free society.  Either the society is free or it is
>hampered by big government.  There needs to be more
>clarity and a clearer linkage between what Ham says is
>a free society, yet, the supposedly unfree, regulated
>society by big government.  How can both of these
>exist, unless the society is in contradiction of
>itself, therefore at such a core issue, such as this
>consumer culture is, this kind of issue could tip the
>scales towards another kind of culture after all of
>this is cleared up.?

I don't believe you're going at this subject with the clarity that it takes 
to come to grips with the anwser you're seeking. No matter how big the 
corporation or government, it is made up of little people like you and me. 
This all sounds suspiciously like just another excuse for failure to me. I 
think that when we accept responsibility for our own actions we understand 
this point very well.

Thanks for your reply,

Dan