[MD] John Carl's Critique of Pure Experience INST04

Sun Aug 2 23:22:03 PDT 2009

And Marsha, I think I  love you.  I do definitely love you loving me, which
must be much the same thing but without making my wife jealous.
John

On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 11:00 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:

>
> Oh dear, it's my lacking a sense of propriety.  I enjoy your posts very
> much.  They are intelligent, thought-provoking and wise...  AND you have a
> wonderful sense of humor.  This one, though, just meandered across the part
> of my brain that stimulates absurdity.
>
> I love you John...
>
>
> Marsha
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org
> [mailto:moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org] On Behalf Of MarshaV
> Sent: Sunday, August 02, 2009 1:41 PM
> To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
> Subject: Re: [MD] John Carl's Critique of Pure Experience INST04
>
>
> You are a funny guy, and I appreciate the laughter, but this one was just
> too much...  You wrote,
>
> "What is the whole point of man's existence but to conceptualize?  It's
> something we do better than all the animals, it lies at the heart of our
> intellectual being, and I don't see the point of denigrating or bemoaning
> the fact that we inevitably conceptualize."
>
> Talk about reality is whatever you think!
>
>
> Marsha
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org
> [mailto:moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org] On Behalf Of John Carl
> Sent: Sunday, August 02, 2009 1:24 PM
> To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
> Subject: Re: [MD] John Carl's Critique of Pure Experience INST04
>
> Good one indeed Marsha.  Thank you.
> I've gotten that "compliment" a few times from Dave and it always
> makes me wonder, just a bit, exactly how to take it.  Like a comedian
> doing stand-up where the house is real quiet and nobody laughs at his
> jokes and afterward somebody comes up to him and says, "That was
> great.  Real thought provoking."
>
> Ok... maybe wasn't what he was going for, but ok.
>
> John
>
> On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 10:15 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>
> > John,
> >
> > You are such a funny guy...  Here's a repost of my very, very favorite
> DanG
> > story...
> >
> >
> >
> > John, From: Dan Glover <daneglover at hotmail.com>
> > To: <moq_discuss at moqtalk.org>
> > Date: Tue, 5 May 2009 02:01:51 -0500
> > Subject: Re: [MD] (no subject)
> >
> >
> > Driving down the road one day, in a hurry as usual, I caught sight of a
> > sign
> > just as I passed it. Curious, I made a u-turn and went back. The sign
> said:
> > Buddist Temple and just below that was a little hand-painted note that
> > said:
> > All Are Welcome. So I drove into the compound. I parked the car in the
> > parking lot and walked into the temple.
> >
> > Your sign is misspelled, I told the young man at the counter. He laughed
> a
> > loud belly laugh. I thought maybe he hadn't understood me. I explained
> that
> > there should be an "h" in Buddhist. He laughed again, this time falling
> to
> > the floor and rolling around as he grabbed his sides with his hands as if
> > his ribs hurt from laughing so hard.
> >
> > About this time an older man appeared from behind some curtains,
> apparently
> > drawn by the laughter. Thinking that the older man was in charge, I
> > approached him. He wore a long orange robe and he looked quite regal from
> a
> > distance but as he got closer I could see many tattered rips in his robe
> > that had been carefully repaired and I could see his nose hair needed
> > trimming. The man looked very old.
> >
> > Hey mister, I said, I thought you should know that your sign out on the
> > road
> > is misspelled. It should read B-U-D-D-H-I-S-T, not Buddist. He looked at
> me
> > a long time without saying a word. I thought perhaps he didn't speak
> > English. I looked over my shoulder for the younger man who could perhaps
> > translate for me but he had disappeared.
> >
> > When I looked back towards the old man, he had turned around and was
> > walking
> > back through the curtain from where he'd first appeared. He waved a hand
> > over his shoulder as if motioning me to follow. So I did. We walked down
> a
> > long hallway, made a turn to the left, and then a turn to the right, and
> > emerged outside close to where I parked. The old man motioned me to get
> in
> > my car, so I did. Then he waved goodbye. So I drove off.
> >
> > On my way out of the compound, I stopped, pulled down the Buddist Temple
> > sign, and threw it in the weeds that grew by the road.
> >
> >
> >
> > -----------
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org
> > [mailto:moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org] On Behalf Of John Carl
> > Sent: Sunday, August 02, 2009 12:45 PM
> > To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
> > Subject: Re: [MD] John Carl's Critique of Pure Experience INST04
> >
> > On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 2:01 AM, Ian Glendinning
> > <ian.glendinning at gmail.com>wrote:
> >
> > John, DMB, again, you are at the nub of all our issues ...
> >
> >
> >
> > Well for some that might be an aggravation, but for me it's a relief.  I
> > only think "root" when I hear "radical".  Nothing else.  Well... there is
> > this quick conceptualized radish that twinkles in my brain for a moment.
> I
> > always associate radishes with radicals.  Just like Dave associates lima
> > beans with low quality.
> >
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > DMB "the idea is to fix that defective value-free intellect."
> > >
> > > John "Man will inevitably conceptualize, its in his nature."
> > >
> > > It certainly has been human nature ... but it's an evolved and
> > > evolving nature ... we can still learn.
> > >
> > > Clearly we are never going to get some "pure" definitive handle on
> > > pure-experience (or Quality) without contaminating it with conceptual
> > > objects.
> >
> >
> > Almost there, "contamination" should be in quotes cuz that implies some
> > sort
> > of evil infiltration, does it not?  What is the whole point of man's
> > existence but to conceptualize?  It's something we do better than all the
> > animals, it lies at the heart of our intellectual being, and I don't see
> > the
> > point of denigrating or bemoaning the fact that we inevitably
> > conceptualize.
> >
> > Because it keeps us from experiencing the moment?  What moment?  That one
> > right there?  Or the one coming up next?
> >
> > It's a ridiculous game invented to keep you going in circles so you can
> see
> > the circles so you can stop going around in circles.
> >
> > "Transcend" is the aim of that game.  But because Pirsig has to make some
> > sort of static statement to get you to see these circles, and W James
> > comprehends the needed psychotherapeutic solution to the static
> > intellectual
> > traps of SOM, acolytes of Jamesian Pirsigianism turn the circle into an
> > object of veneration which means it's now degeneracy to get off!   Let us
> > all bow down and say Ohhhmmmm before the great Pure Experience.  And on
> and
> > on it goes, whither it stops, nobody knows.
> >
> > I wonder if this is sort of Bo's point.  I'm not very good at
> > following other people's arguments.  But then, nobody is.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > BUT what this kind of radical empiricism is saying is PLEASE
> > > notice that defect, PLEASE discount your pre-conceived objects so far
> > > as you possibly can whenever experiencing something, or interpreting
> > > experience in another.
> > >
> >
> >
> > Which might be very helpful to some kinds of intellectuals, in some kinds
> > of
> > intellectual traps.  I mean please look carefully at "pre-concieved"
>  What
> > exactly is that?  I know it means "that idea that is in your mind BEFORE
> > experience"  but some ideas that are before experience come in right
> handy.
> >  For instance, if I have an idea that the stove might be hot, my
> > pre-conception is gonna keep my butt from getting burned.  Is that "lower
> > quality" than actually getting the pure experience of blistered buns?
> >
> >  Has anybody ever defined the MoQ as a system designed specifically to
> cure
> > the world view problems of academics?  I don't think that's fair.
> >  Motorcycles mechanics need metaphysics too, ya know.  Preferably
> something
> > easy to handle that stores nicely but works well when you need it and
> > doesn't break.
> >
> > A larger-than-lifetime guarantee wouldn't be so bad.
> >
> > John
> >
> > 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/
> >
> 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/
>
> 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/
>
> 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/
>