[MD] Teachings from the American Earth (Part I)

[Heather Perella]

      [SA previously]
> >  What is good?  As in dog good/good dog.

     [Bo]  
> In the MOQ goodness (Quality) is the given X about
> which nothing can be said. About the static levels a
lot
> can be said. Why ask these questions, we are
supposed to have
> moved beyond MOQ kindergarten ;-)     

     I thought you were supposed to have moved beyond
MOQ kindergarden, but I had to bring this up. :-)  How
can you talk about X, goodness, yet, it is supposed to
not be intellectual?  Yet, something intellectual,
something thoughtful, can be social to you, so, we're
not going to be on the same page here.



     [Bo] 
> Thus it's plain: What's described in ZMM as SOM
> replacing Aretê is the intellectual level emerging
out of the social
> level. For you and those who cling to the illusion
of American
> Indians living in some golden DQ reality, the quote
above may be a
> sobering information. 

     That good dog must have been a celebrity?  Ought
to just through away the Z in ZMM while were at it. 
To have whole societies embrace intellectual dynamic
quality would be a far cry from the current western
'those who think they know' separate from 'those that
are just dumb and need to know what others know'.  It
is as 'those that know' in western society have some
kind of code, as in don't enter here unless you know
geometry (referring to Plato's school), for your a big
dummy and aren't worth our time if you don't know
geometry, just stick with washing your dishes and
sitting in the woods.

     [Bo]
> If you are interested I can provide a more
"academic" version of 
> how to interpret ZMM in a MOQ light.

     See here's the academic version, cause you'll
never figure it out for yourself, don't even rely upon
your self, we've got this code, the secret knowledge
in academics and since nobody has time to continually
go to an academic center and think what we think, for
some have to feed the us thinkers, then we might as
well create a society of those that know and those
that wish they knew what we know for its not in
yourself its' in us. 


> Yepp here it comes, but this is unjust. I am the one
> who has moved beyond intellect and insist on seeing
things
> from MOQ's meta-level where intellect is a STATIC
level, while
> you seem stuck at intellect and try to make the MOQ
some New
> Age spiritual nonsense.  

     Well then talk about the meta-level instead of
S/O.  Create an intellectual level that matches the
meta-level, or what do you have in mind here?

     Yes, I did get sarcastic on this post, and I
couldn't help myself.  Yet, being sarcastic puts a
twist on what is trying to be said and I think
conveyed how you sound to me at times.  If you could
please clear up this mess, as you seem to want to talk
about a meta-level, then I'm all for it.  I'm just not
interested in S and O and this divide stuff.


 
thanks.

cold blue,
SA



 
____________________________________________________________________________________
Need Mail bonding?
Go to the Yahoo! Mail Q&A for great tips from Yahoo! Answers users.
http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396546091