[MD] Food for Thought

[David M]

Hi MOQers

And Abel and Cain got out a ruler
and measured who had the biggest head.
And Abel finally had to admit that it was Cain.
And so the ruler became the arbitrator of
all disagreement. This was great for 3,000 years of peace
until Abel and Cain had objectified everything
in the world that they could. Then Abel suggested
that his head was more beautiful than Cains,
and they got back to the fighting about how things
looked from their perspective.

Then they killed each other and nothing was true
because there are no views from nowhere.

And the ruler led a sad and lonely life on its own.

David M


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Case" <Case at iSpots.com>
To: <moq_discuss at moqtalk.org>
Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2007 11:53 PM
Subject: Re: [MD] Food for Thought


>> [Case]
>> So you feel safer just taking the mystics word for it when they say they
>> have plugged into the ultimate nature or reality.
>
> [Platt]
> Feel safer? My safety is not the issue. I leave that to the police and
> the military.
>
> [Case]
> You feeling confident in the testimony of mystics? You think their 
> testimony
> is reliable? You ascribe validity to their testimony? Do I need to start
> making up new words to ask questions? There is precedent for that here.
>
> [Platt]
> What is the "true meaning" and "significance" of any experience?
>
> [Case]
> Do you think your individual mystic experience is generalizable to 
> everyone?
>
>
> [Platt]
> The solitary events of  the creation of the universe, life and your
> particular birth have plenty of meaning don't you think, like the fact
> that you are asking about meaning?
>
> [Case]
> I trust the experience of physicist over mystic with regard to the 
> solitary
> creation of the universe. That's their job. As for the creation of life
> there is nothing to suggest that it is a one time only event.
>
> The solitary nature of my birth is and instance of a general process. I am
> and iteration.
>
> [Platt]
> Many science types do, and I haven't seen you accept any truth other
> than what would pass scientific "tests." But, I could be wrong about
> the latter.
>
> [Case]
> Science types are more likely to declare what isn't true than what is. But
> there are many kinds of truth.
>
> [Platt]
> Slopping thinking? Seems you have some criteria of truth after all.
> Pray tell, what might they be if not based on assumptions of science?
>
> [Case]
> That would depend on the question asked. But generally speaking I am 
> looking
> for answers that apply regardless of a particular point of view. That is
> what the assumptions of science are set up to reveal. What goes up, must
> come down was true regardless of what one thought about it until the 
> Voyager
> spacecraft was launched.
>
> 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/
>