[MD] Evolution

Sat Aug 1 14:13:43 PDT 2009

On 7/31/09 11:08 PM, "markhsmit" <markhsmit at aol.com> wrote:

[Willblake2]
Reality is whatever you think it is?  What utter nonsense!  Sounds like a
definite dead end in the evolutionary tree of philosophy.  If reality is
whatever you think, then what is the youthat is creating that reality?
Isn't that "you" a little more real than the reality it is creating?
Or do you create you?  It's like a snake eating it's own tail!  Cyclical
platitudes are so wonderfully useless.  Reality is what you make it, ha!,
indeed.  That is really a useful statement, and where does that get you?
Reality is what you feel?  Then what is creating those feelings?  This is
truly a concept which is simply self serving, and if that is you enlightened
whisper, good luck with that!

[Willblake2]
No reality is outside what our feeble brains are trying to make of it.  Yet
the brains are part of it, entirely.  I would suggest a little more thought
goes into getting out of these self-centered ideas.  They will get you
nowhere, completely useless.

Just an opinion and suggestion.

Willblake2

Hi Willblake 2, and all;

[Joe]
Glad to hear from you.   Reality is a manifestation.  Imho In order for
something to manifest three principles have to come together.  The active
principle, what it is.   The passive principle, what it can be. The neutral
principle, what is the level of evolution upholding it.  An individual with
self-will chooses  the level of manifestation, and is responsible.  If the
individual is not allowed to choose then reality is whatever the controller
thinks it is.   

[Willblake2/
Reality is whatever you think it is?  What utter nonsense!

[Joe] 
The active and passive principles both change and are only locked into the
neutral principle at the level of evolution.  If nothing stays the same
evolution is infinite and meaningless.   I do not know what your take is on
evolution, but Pirsig accepts it.  The subtitle to LILA is AN INQUIRY INTO
MORALS.  I take that to mean that evolution is an inquiry into morals.

[Joe]
If you are responsible to just yourself, then evolution to a social level is
meaningless.  If you can be influenced by others, I do not see anything
wrong in that.  If I am a law unto myself, I can never change.  I find a lot
wrong with that.  I have changed the title to MOQ Evolution

Joe

> Reality is whatever you think it is? ?What utter nonsense! ?Sounds like a
> definite dead end?
in the evolutionary tree of philosophy. ?If reality is
> whatever you think, then what is the you
that is creating that reality? ?Isn't
> that "you" a little more real than the reality it is creating?
Or do you
> create you? ?It's like a snake eating it's own tail! ?Cyclical platitudes are
> so
wonderfully useless. ?Reality is what you make it, ha!, indeed. ?That is
> really a useful?
statement, and where does that get you? ?Reality is what you
> feel? ?Then what is creating
those feelings? ?This is truly a concept which is
> simply self serving, and if that is
you enlightened whisper, good luck with
> that!

No reality is outside what our feeble brains are trying to make of it.
> ?Yet the brains are part?
of it, entirely. ?I would suggest a little more
> thought goes into getting out of these?
self-centered ideas. ?They will get
> you nowhere, completely useless.

Just an opinion and
> suggestion.

Willblake2

On Jul 21, 2009, at 2:04:00 PM, MarshaV
> <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
From:   MarshaV <valkyr at att.net>
Subject:    Re: [MD]
> Evolution
Date:   July 21, 2009 2:04:00 PM PDT
To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org

Hi
> Joe,

You seem to think evolution is important, I want to get at what is
> behind
names, definitions and explanation.?

Marsha

-----Original
> Message-----
From:
> moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org
[mailto:moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtal
> k.org] On Behalf Of Joseph Maurer
Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2009 4:38 PM
To:
> moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
Subject: Re: [MD] Evolution

On 7/20/09 1:26 PM,
> "MarshaV" <valkyr at att.net> wrote:

[Marsha]
Evolution is a high quality
> intellectual (scientific) static pattern of
value concerned with the order of
> existence.

[Marsha]
Holy Moly, I'm from Michigan too. Small world. My
> favorite place was Irish
Hills where my Oma lived on one of the Twin
> Lakes.

[Marsha]
Reality? I was in tears of joy with the best understanding of
> REALITY I
ever heard spoken by Lila: "...I'm whatever your questions turn me
> into. You
don't see that. It's your questions that make me who I am. If you
> think I'm
an angel then that's what I am. If you think I'm a whore then that's
> what I
am. I'm whatever you think. And if you change your mind about me then
> I
change too. So whatever Richard tells you, it's true. There's no way he
> can
lie about me." - Reality is whatever you think it is, there's no way
you
> can lie about it, and if you change your understanding of reality,
> then
reality changes too.

Hi Marsha and all,

[Joe]
Reality/Evolution. Platt
> denies that intellect can determine value. “I’m
whatever your questions turn
> me into.”

[Joe]
Imho I ordinarily do not think. In an analogy to a coin there
> are three
questions to ask about every manifestation. What it is, active? What
> it
is not, passive? At what level of evolution is it, neutral? Ordinarily
“I’m
> whatever your questions turn me into” emphasizes the passive “I am made
into
> something!”?

[Joe]
“Reality is whatever you think it is, there's no way
you
> can lie about it, and if you change your understanding of reality,
> then
reality changes too.”

[Joe]
My impulse starts from an active “do
> something attitude” which is quite
insensitive. Imho the neutral “edge” of the
> coin, existence, remains
unspoken but understood in most statements of
> experience in that it is
undefined, not-conscious,
> evolution.

Joe

Marsha:
Reality? I was
> in tears of joy with the best
> understanding of REALITY I
ever heard spoken by
> Lila: "...I'm whatever your
> questions turn me into. You
don't see that. It's
> your questions that make me
> who I am. If you think I'm
an angel then that's
> what I am. If you think I'm
> a whore then that's what I
am. I'm whatever you
> think. And if you change
> your mind about me then I
change too. So whatever
> Richard tells you, it's
> true. There's no way he can
lie about me." -
> Reality is whatever you think
> it is, there's no way
you can lie about it, and
> if you change your
> understanding of reality, then
reality changes too.?

>?
Marsha

>
> Greetings Joe,
>?
> What is not relative? I might wonder
> what put you into a
> seminary for 12
> years? I was very small when I sensed
> there was something
> behind the
words
> and explanations: the moon, the
> Absolute, Dynamic
> Quality. Not this, not
> that, and certainly not a
> metaphysics.
>?
> And
> what is good, Ph©¡drus,
> And what is not good...
>
> Need we ask anyone to
> tell us these things?
>?
> Did you find the explanations
> for circling the
> moon satisfying? Creation?
> Evolution? I'd say: not this,
> not that.
>?
> I
> love the Metaphysics of Quality, an inquiry into morals.
>
>?
>?
>
> Marsha?
>?
>?
>?
>?
>?
>?
>?
>?
> -----Original Message-----
>
> From:
> moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org
>
>
> [mailto:moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org] On Behalf Of Joseph Maurer>
>
> Sent: Sunday, July 19, 2009 5:29 PM
> To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
> Subject:
>
> Re: [MD] Evolution
>?
>?
>?
>?
> On 7/19/09 12:43 AM, "MarshaV"
>
> <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>?
> Hi Marsha and all,
>?
> My thought as I typed
>
> ©øAbsolute©÷ was that Pirsig tied morals to evolution.
> On my copy of Lila
> the
> subtitle is AN INQUIRY INTO MORALS. My sense is
that
> for Pirsig
> evolution
> is not speculation, but the metaphysical description
> for levels
> of Quality.
> These levels become the metaphysical basis for
> morality. Is it
> that just
> metaphysical descriptions are subject to
> evolution, or are
> social laws? My
> thought is that the members of society
> are also evolving
> or have already
> evolved to the intellectual level and
> beyond (Bo©ös
> meta-level). IMO the
> basis for morality transcends cultural
> differences so
> I used the word
> ©øAbsolute©÷. I would not defend it other
> than in an
> evolutionary scenario.
> I sincerely hope that explanation helps
> relieve the
> ©øtroubling©÷.
>?
> I
> realize now that mathematics©ö has broader
> conceptualizations, the
> universe.
> Maybe evolution is specific to Earth©ös
> inhabitants. I do not
> want to start
> a creation-evolution debate, even
> though morality may not be
> specific to
> earth, when Worlds collide. IMO
> Pirsig avoided discussing any
> origins for
> the moon©ös orbit around the
> earth. But I have read some
> explanations for
> the moon©ös orbit around
> Earth.
>?
> Joe
>?
>> Greetings Joe,
>>?
>> Isn't
> evolution also related to
> human conceptualization? Where does the
>> very
> word and definition of
> 'evolution' come from? Isn't evolution
merely
>> the
> best intellectual
> (scientific) static pattern of value explaining the
>>
> origin of life on
> Earth? What about time? Does evolution assume a
>>
> relationship with time?
> Is time an Absolute? No, how can it be, is it
>>
> related to change/motion?
> Your view of evolution as Absolute on planet
>>
> Earth is troubling.
>>?
>>
> Marsha
>>?
>>?
>>?
>> Hi Marsha and all.
>>?
>> My
> story is chance. I
> studied in a Catholic Seminary, College and
>> Monastery
> for 12 years. After
> 12 years of studying St Thomas Aquinas, I
>> thought I
> knew Philosophy. I
> was married to Louise after Anna was born.
> We
>> studied
> esotericism for 4
> years with a lady who had studied with John
>> Bennett.?
>>
>?
>> Louise
> decided to get a BA degree so she could get a better job, and in
>
> the
>>
> course of her studies Zen and the Art was suggested reading. She told
> me
>
> I
>> would like it. I did, and later I bought Lila in paperback. Then
> by
>
> chance
>> I found the forum.
>>?
>> I was skeptical, but something in me
>
> resonates to Quality. I think
> evolution
>> is Absolute truth on planet
>
> Earth.
>>?
>> Joe
>>?
>>> Hi Joe,
>>>?
>>> Nothing wrong with conventional
>
> truth as long as I don't mistake it for
>>> Absolute Truth. Evolution is a
>
> great conventional truth. It has a
>> history,
>>> it has changed over time,
>
> and will continue to change until it has too
>> many
>>> anomalies to
> survive.
> I like to think of everyday experience and
>>> conventional truth
> like a
> kaleidoscope. Each shift exposes a different,
>>> astounding view.
> But I
> haven't always been so mellow.
>>>?
>>> What's your story Joe? What
> moved you
> to philosophy? What brought you
> to
>>> this forum?
>>>?
>>>?
>>>
> Marsha
>>
>?
>>?

Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing
>
> etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
h
> 
> 
> ttp://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/p
> 
> ipermail/moq_discuss_archive/

Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo,
> Unsubscribing 
> etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
h
> ttp://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/p
> ipermail/moq_discuss_archive/

Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo,
> Unsubscribing 
> etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
h
> ttp://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/p
> ipermail/moq_discuss_archive/

Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo,
> Unsubscribing 
> etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
h
> ttp://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/p
> ipermail/moq_discuss_archive/