[MD] Perceptions: the deception of it all...

[MarshaV]

On <12:24 PM 6/4/2009> you responded to my post, paraphrasing 
Krishnamurti and David Bohm, with "Well they got it backwards 
then.  Truth is abstract, logical, of the word.  Reality is direct 
sensory experience, of the image." And then you sited a book by 
Jaques Ellul.

What was your point?   And what is the point of your pinky, toes and 
brushing your teeth; metaphysically speaking, these statements are 
important why?  And since the subject of these posts makes "your eyes 
sorta glaze over",  why did you think you could creatively add 
something of interest to the topic?

Self to me is the definition below, ego is the mistaken belief that 
the patterns you experience are your creation and yours to own.


Marsha



At 12:44 AM 6/5/2009, you wrote:
> >
> >
> >> How is judgement related to Quality?    Judgement is our apprehension of
> >> Quality? Judgement is the subjective realization of non-subjective
> >> Quality?
> >>
> >
> > Quality creates subject and object, so the subject judgement is secondary.
>
>
>Metaphysically speaking, I agree.  But personally speaking, judgement occurs
>to me first - it is primary.  If I perceive at all, it is out of some
>judgement - even to the extent of  judging whether something I experience is
>real or not, the first thing I sense is a judgement - a correspondence
>  between consciousness and reality.  I can grasp this event as a creation of
>Quality - but my primary experience of this Quality event is a judgement
>that defines myself.
>
>My apprehension of other is a form of judgement.  My judgement informs me of
>me.
>
>Like I said...
>
>  Sigh.  So much to ponder, so little time.
> >>
> >> I admit my eyes sorta glaze over when someone tries to explain insight
> >> using
> >> words about something  beyond thought and language.  I mean, what IS the
> >> point?
> >>
> >
> > The point is experience without self-ego.
>
>
>
>And the point of that is?  I'm not trying to be obstreperous.  It's just
>that my self-ego seems to be a such a useful intellectual construct and
>while I believe those who claim it is possible to transcend
>self-consciousness I wonder in all sincerity, why? As long as I don't base
>my metaphysical presuppositions on this handy creation, it seems useful for
>walking around and dealing with the world in the way that occurs to me.  In
>a minute, I'm gonna use mine to go brush my teeth for me.
>
>
>
> >  Sure you can call it Quality.  You can call it anything and fall
> >> into whatever word trap you prefer.  I'll  just go ahead and park in my
> >> driveway.
> >>
> >
> >
>
> > Chopping wood might be nice.
> >
>
>
>Well I tell you, last time I chopped wood my self-ego really came in handy.
>  But lately I've been peeling poles cuz it's good therapy for a broken
>pinky; chopping is too jarring.
>
>
> >> "Abstract cleverness of mind only separates the thinker from the world of
> >> reality, and that world, the Forest of Real Life, is in a desperate
> >> condition now because of too many who think too much and care too little."
> >>
> >
> > Yes, I could agree if you mean caring with head, heart and hand.
>
>
>Absolutely.  I like that.  Head, heart and hands.
>
>And pinkies.
>
>And toes.
>
>I mention toes because one of my big ones is being pounced upon and clawed
>and bitten by a tiny kitten right now as I'm writing this, and I'm having to
>take care to wiggle it carefully.
>
>J
>
>------------
>The self is a point along a dynamic continuum, evolving toward Quality by
>Choice.
>------------
>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/


.
_____________

The self is a thought-flow of ever-changing, interrelated and 
interconnected, inorganic, biological, social and intellectual, 
static patterns of value responding to Dynamic Quality.

.
.