[MD] Consciousness

[ml]

Bo,
Just some thoughts...

----- Original Message -----
From: <skutvik at online.no>
To: <moq_discuss at moqtalk.org>
Sent: Monday, December 22, 2008 2:29 AM
Subject: Re: [MD] Consciousness


Bo:
Don't take me too seriously, but I get a bit frustrated over new
participants arriving and falling into one or the other pitfall (of two)
that's prevents an understanding of the MOQ. One is the "intelligence"
one that Mel is in (that caused Platt to write the above) the other is the
"grand concept" one that I wrote to Kieffer Odigaunt about yesterday.
Your FAITH is another one (that I hereby add to my list) that you
believe will allow intellect to expand. These are all candidates for MOQ
replicas and would serve, but VALUE is best.

mel:
Oh, the wailing and the gnashing of teeth
I have been consigned to a circle of  Skutvikian
hell.   Oh, the tearing of clothes and the
beating of breast as I wallow in my shame.
I have frustrated the Bo.  (...and the Debbil
pokes me with his fork and says. "Don't
annoy the Bo.")   ;-)

Bo:
The thing is that the intellectual level is static and its static value is
the
S/O aggregate (in the "objective over subjective" sense) or REASON
for short, and it is incapable of  ..."going into stillness, beyond reason,
beyond formal logic ...etc"

mel:
I only address mind, intellect, and its fellow
travelers when I see what seem to be counter-
productive wastes of energy, and direction.

If you underestimate what intellegence is,
you risk failing to understand its limits and
that is an invitation to build a bridge too short
to cross the canyon, leaving you on one side.

[My approach to real life (outside MoQ discussion)
is to let silence still the illusion of
mind-self-separateness and let Quality(?)
lead, push, slide where it will.]

     Hence:

The Dynamic runs two directions.  It is not a simple
binary.

The Intellectual level is not static, nor is the Social,
nor the Biological, nor the Physical.  Each level is
an accretion of earlier Dynamic Quality folding into--
creating--structure.  Each level still responds to the
dynamic according to its structure and each is still
being created, destroyed, changed.
(Obviously "lower" levels are "more structured"
 as any foundational level should be to "support"
 what is above.)

Bo:
There is a sphere around the static levels, namely  the MOQ
itself and this contains all these fine states, insights,
mysticisms that you speak about.

mel:
This statement seems to say you are creating just the
split in existence that the MOQ is able to do away with.

Bo:
This interpretation is called the SOL and have been promoted by this
person for years and years as the only way to look upon the intellectual
level that harmonizes ZAMM and LILA and makes the MOQ one solid
unassailable edifice.

mel:
The oddly ironic part is, it seemed to me that
(BO was) you were caught in a mind-intellect vortex, as
it appeared to me, by power-welding Subjective-Objective
onto the intellectual level.



Paco:

> Take the question of God. The existence of God cannot be proven or
> disproven by reason or science [although, I think, proofs for God's
> existence have an edge over proofs for non-existence]. Thus intellect's
> leap of faith -- non-scientific, non-rational and not irrational, but
> reasonable -- bringing along all other powers. As the God in the Bible
> suggests: "Be stll and know that I am God." (Psalm 46:11).

BO:
If you manage to understand my meanderings: Replace God by
Quality and you have the same "system" only that the MOQ places
traditional religions as social value (lower in the static range than
science). Yet, by making Science and Reason (which are religions
opponents) into its own 4th. level, this "degrading" makes them
subservient to Quality itself, and if God=Quality, the MOQ comes to
religion's rescue. However religion will probably not accept being
rescued this way Likewise Reason & Science (SOM) will say "no
thanks" to be part of the MOQ, so until further notice the MOQ is
anathema in both camps    ... to the degree they have heard about the
MOQ.

mel:
I question your analysis of religion, Bo.  You seem to have either
no experience with it, or did not pay attention, or are over-generalizing.

Religion, as an activity of man, exists in and is dependent upon
all four levels. Not being intimately familiar with all religions I can
only show what I mean in the shared attributes of the history of
Abraham's Religion, Buddha's Teachings, Christ's Religion,
Mohammad's Religion.
1
A high quality dynamic experience is afterward, presented
into a small intimate group outside of the prevailing social
situation where its special nature is appreciated as novel.
2
Those "appreciators" are one step removed from the most
dynamic (seeming miraculous) nature of the experience and
it becomes a teaching (a less dynamic experience, but
important).  Many will strive to attain, but the others will
expend great intellectual energy to create an orthodoxy to
prevent error.
3
Bonding around the  orthodoxy will create a
social group.   This will seek to (initially) guide the behavior
of the biological level creatures toward the Dynamic, but will
rapidly apply social forces in place of the "core dynamic"
that was the intial reason for its existence.
4
Biological practices will become "touch stones" to point
beyond the person, but still draw the person towards where
to look for the described nature of the remembered original
dynamic experience.
5
Real physical things will become "holy" to the narrative
of the tradition.   Pilgrimages will be made.  Objects will
help focus the attention.  They become allegory or are
themselves special...

Results:

Meaning will be taken where and when it can be, and
at its best if a point of meaning becomes an excuse to
open to, or launch into, or enter with, or surrender to, a
formless pure DQ, then it works.

On the other hand, if the individual gets lost in the
layers and ends by flying a plane into a building,
launching a pogrom/holocaust,  stoning those who
choose their own way or an infinity of misdirection,
then maybe something new needs to be in the works.
 (This is what happens when a "faith" gets too tangled
  up between the layers and cannot sort itself out.
  It can fight its own purpose.)

Of course if this group is an attempt to create an
orthodoxy, then we are at step two.
I would prefer to focus on the Dynamic.

...Midway through the course of my life I find myself
awakening in a forest and there appears a guide.
Is it Virgil? No, it is a man on a motorbike...
And thus begins the literary masterwork, the epic
of "Skutvik's Inferno."

Now, which ring of hell am I in?   ;-)

Seriously, though, sorry if I DO annoy you,
but thanks for the prompt and opportunity.

thanks--mel