[MD] Just coincidence?

[Arlo J. Bensinger]

[Peter to Joseph]
We think mind is something private to the individual 'with no possibility of
affecting anyone but the individual'; yes and no. Our intentions always affect
the larger body (we are psycho-physical organisms)...

[Arlo jumps in]
I agree with your "yes and no", but wanted to stretch your example. Our "mind"
is the internal appropriation of the collective mythos. As such, there is both
uniqueness (as our individual mirogenetic experience varies) but structured
commonality through a cultural value system reflective, and patterned by the
countless voices of others with which the mythos is composed (appropriation as
ventriliquation). When our voice is added back to the collective, and then
becomes part of the chorus-mythos appropriated by someone else, the saliences
of the mythos are altered, slightly or greatly.

I do agree that "mind" is naught but convention. A static description of a
temporally active experiental locus, and one that exists nowhere outside the
mythos (the mythos gives us a way to attempt to preserve the "past" and the
predict the "future", giving rise to the illusion of a constant "I" passing
through time). (In ZMM, Pirsig notes Kant's position that "time is an
intuition", an "a priori" concept which "have their origins in human nature so
that they’re neither caused by the sensed object (objectivism) nor bring it
into being (subjectivism)" [parens added], reflecting the emegentist position
of the MOQ). 

Arlo