[MD] Static Self

[gav]

well i think dmb and ron have answered the objections but i'll respond as well micah, out of courtesy if nothing else.
thinker = subject; thought = object. on the level of SOM there is always a thinker and a thought - the two are inseparable. on the level of the MOQ the thinker and thought are both patterns abstracted from immediate experience - thinking. the process 'thinking' is ontologically prior to thought or thinker.
'an individual' (noun) is different from 'individual' (adjective). a dog or cat or raindrop doesn't qualify as *an* individual but there are of course individual examples of dogs/cats etc.
an individual is self-conscious - which is an intellectual value pattern.

cheers



--- On Wed, 9/7/08, Ron Kulp <RKulp at ebwalshinc.com> wrote:

> From: Ron Kulp <RKulp at ebwalshinc.com>
> Subject: Re: [MD] Static Self
> To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
> Received: Wednesday, 9 July, 2008, 11:43 PM
> Dmb:
> 
> How can there be thoughts without a thinker? The same way
> there can be
> rain without a rainer. We say "it is raining"
> without bothering to ask
> about the "it" because we know that there is
> nothing doing the raining
> except the rain itself. There is no agent above or beyond
> the rain which
> performs this function. And that's how it is with
> thinking. Why does
> there need to be an agent which performs this task? Why
> does there need
> to be an entity above and beyond the thinking itself? See,
> from a
> certain perspective your question is absurd. It is very
> much like belief
> in the rainer behind the rain, or the thunderer beyond the
> thunder or
> the grower separate from the growth.
> 
> As Gav recently pointed out, the individualism you're
> advocating here is
> classic SOM. It is one of the most basic and central ideas
> in the Modern
> West since Descartes. It also happens to be Pirsig's
> central target in
> ZAMM. He deconstructs it with a vengence. 
> 
> Ron:
> Damn, talk about capturing it all within a paragraph!!! 
> spirituality, perception and awareness. To me, you have
> just defined how MoQ relates to all of these.
> 
> Micah:
> There can be no thought without a thinker, again as many
> times before on
> this board, you use man to establish reality, then remove
> man to define
> reality...when man is reality.
> 
> Ron:
> Man is reality and reality is man. You run anthropocentrism
> to
> the point of solipsism when you follow this line out. What
> Dmb is saying is that there is no solid concrete entities
> isolated in space. They are interrelated emergences that
> manifest
> through inorganic, organic, biological and social patterns
> so that the "self" as perceived as isolated is an
> illusion.
> 
> What you need to do is get a church of Micah going.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 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/


      Start at the new Yahoo!7 for a better online experience. www.yahoo7.com.au