[MD] Flying Spagetti Monsters

[Heather Perella]

     [Micah]
How does gravity define, please frame your answer in
gravity's perspective and language, or better yet get
gravity to log on and participate in this forum.


     Micah, the point I'm making is mu within your
perspective.  Your emphasis seems to be Man and then
you stop.  I would include woman, and maybe you do,
too.  As to measure, what does that mean to you.  You
seem to portray measure to mean Man, too.  It's all in
the head perspective.  If this is not so, then maybe
we can chat.
     As to my perspective, I'm here in primary
reality, trying to put this into words, and I do.  As
to how these discussions/words will be understood,
well, that's something we may have to work upon.  I
have a different perception, thus, obviously how I
define 'man is the measure of all things' will come
out differently than your definition.  For one, the
1st paragraph above I typed has an assumption built
into our defining.  Obvious enough...
     As for gravity.  Gravity is right here typing
away, along with this human being, air, and water. 
Without either of these how could I type, define, or
anything else.  Thus, gravity is built into this
defining human being.  Oh, and we've got this
computer, too.  All of this is simple enough and you
might be saying, and yeah, but what of gravity
defining, as seems to be your asking above.  Gravity
is being measured and is part of the measuring I this
human being am capable of measuring gravity due to
its' presence being here to measure.  If flying
spaghetti monsters were here, then we would measure
them, etc...  The reality I'm focused upon does not
end and begin with this human being measuring.  I'm
including a reality that is 'things being measured',
also.  I also include within this reality, not just
human being, human being doing the measuring, 'things'
that are measured by this human being, but I'm also
stating reality is this whole event.  This whole event
is not solely human being, or solely the measuring, or
solely the things.  The whole event is all of these
together.  What is that called?  What is the emphasis
in this event?  I'm not leaning upon any one of these
'solely' parts.  I'm putting all of these parts
together, and saying that's primary reality.  Once I
do this, my perspective is no longer pin-pointed upon
man measures and how can gravity measure.  I'm mu on
this point.  I'm noticing not these parts, but how
these parts work together.  That's all.  So, can I
blank out everything in reality and just solely notice
me defining, and state 'me defining' is reality only. 
No.  I've got gravity being defined, and that gravity
and me together, for one, this relationship with
gravity benefits my defining to occur, for the
importance of gravity on this earth is known, and
secondly gravity being here gives me something to
define as gravity.  Thirdly, not in any particular
order, and not solely the only relationship gravity
and human being are involved with, but this is
instance, without gravity, without me, would we have
this reality that includes gravity and me and all the
parts of this primary reality.  I've put into words, a
dryness of thought though this might be, what I'm
focusing upon as primary reality.  Not just human
being defining... no indeed this is not primary
reality in my view.  That is event in particular, and
I'm not stuck on that particular event.  This might be
why my response might be just mu, for I'm not
confining my chat to only 'human being defining'.  I'm
defining with a primary reality hand in hand.

woods,
SA 
     
     


 
____________________________________________________________________________________
Sponsored Link

Online degrees - find the right program to advance your career. 
www.nextag.com