[MD] The End of Philosophy

[MarshaV]

Greetings Will2,

I don't know about nerve cells.  The MOQ is about patterns, and it's 
patterns that represent our conventional reality, and it is about 
Dynamic Quality which is spontaneous interaction with the now.  I 
have reread your post: 08 May 2009 01:11 a.m. and I do not understand 
what you are getting at.  I liked what Gav said about philosophy 
being "playful, creative, personal".  You suggested 'putting together 
a system' and then using a group of cells as an example, and I do not 
understand the analogy.  Not another hero, and not another system.

What is good?  It is quality, and it doesn't come from a system 
telling us but from a direct experience and a direct response.  I 
will hope that a new world-view will come from repeated insights like 
the mythical hundredth monkey.

I will be quiet now, but I hope Gav will say more, for he seems to 
have insight.


Marsha





At 08:49 PM 5/8/2009, you wrote:
>Hi Marsha,
>
>I would define reality in this post discussion as that which we
>experience with our minds.  Is it possible that group
>consciousness experiences the same reality.  Again,
>I will use my analogy of the brain.  Each nerve has its
>own reality, which is separate, and not felt (by the nerve),
>from the consciousness of the mind.  While we cannot
>feel this consciousness, we can discern its presence, just as
>we can discern the presence of other dimensions or imaginary
>numbers (the square root of negative one).  While the square
>root of negative one has no real meaning to our present
>experience, we can use it successfully in mathematics to
>make real predictions.
>
>I think the quality personal insight is wholly separate from the
>group consciousness insight.  One cannot feel the other.
>
>Cheers,
>Willblake2
>On May 8, 2009, at 8:46:01 AM, MarshaV <marshalz at charter.net> wrote:
>At 10:56 AM 5/8/2009, you wrote:
> >Hi Marhs,
> >
> >Wonderful to include you in this discussion. Sorry if I use the word system.
> >
> >I believe, like Pirsig, that there are different levels of
> >interaction each creating
> >its own reality (if you will). For example, each nerve cell has its
> >own reality.
> >The group of nerve cells creates another, which we call the mind (a
> >system). In the same
> >way, each of us have our own reality, but he group reality is
> >separate. We cannot
> >experience that reality in the same way a nerve cannot sense the mind.
>
>Will,
>
>Before I say too much I will need to know what you mean by
>'reality'? It can be a tricky word. And in case of the nerve
>cell, and the group of nerve cells are you saying their reality is
>subjective?
>
>
> >Perhaps the flaw is thinking that we can determine group reality,
> >which results
> >in leaders thinking they can control it. Adopting through insight
> >takes care of
> >what is inside, but let's not stop there.
>
>Wouldn't the quality insight lead to the best action? Or what do you
>mean by 'let's not stop there'?
>
>
>Marsha
>
>
> >Cheers,
> >Willblake2
> >
> >
> >On May 8, 2009, at 3:39:25 AM, MarshaV <marshalz at charter.net> wrote
> >
> >Greetings Will,
> >
> >How many times can the pattern of reaching for quality be repeated
> >before it becomes embedded in the social consciousness? Not another
> >system!!! Exchanged through dialogue??? Not another system with
> >this or that puny little dictator wanting to scurry to the top to
> >define the choices. How about adopted through insight?
> >
> >
> >Marsha
> >
> >
> >At 01:11 AM 5/8/2009, you wrote:
> > >Returning to the old way of thinking, the Upanishads, We can easily
> > >get into a semantic
> > >debate here. What is the difference between philosophy and so
> > >called "mystical thought".
> > >I believe that there is an agreed upon difference. Metaphysics can
> > >easily become
> > >ones own perception only, are we just a brain in a vat?
> > >
> > >The trouble with that for me, is, it becomes entirely personalized
> > >and of no use
> > >to social consciousness. What is good? Need anyone tell us? My
> > >interpretation
> > >of the metaphysical endeavor is to try to put together a system 
> which can be
> > >exchanged through dialogue. A group awareness, if you will, that 
> is separate
> > >from the personal awareness. I believe such a thing exists.
> > >
> > >Are there laws outside of our experience? Do we simply create the
> > >world around us?
> > >Which is a more useful way of thinking from a sociological point of view?
> > >
> > >I don't think these are new ideas, but perhaps worth another round.
> > >
> > >Cheers,
> > >
> > >Willblake2
> > >
> > >On May 7, 2009, at 4:48:12 PM, "Steve Peterson"
> > ><peterson.steve at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > the end of purely abstract philosophy at least.
> > > > but yes in a way most academic philosophy is becoming redundant as the
> > > > existential takes precedence over the 'essential' (by which i mean the
> > > > illogical idea of immutable 'real' laws, facts etc that are
> > > > ontologically prior to experience).
> > > >
> > > > the existential is direct, dynamic, integrated,
> > > > mythopoetic...philosophy now moves toward direct engagement:
> > > > facilition over inculcation.
> > > >
> > > > philosophy become playful, creative, personal.
> > > >
> > >
> > >Would you also say, "Pirsigian"? Or was Pirsig hopping on board an
> > >existing trend in philosophy?
> > >
> > >
> > >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/
> >
> >.
> >_____________
> >
> >Shoot for the moon. Even if you miss, you'll land among the stars.........
> >.
> >.
> >
> >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/
>
>.
>_____________
>
>Shoot for the moon. Even if you miss, you'll land among the stars.........
>.
>.
>
>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/

.
_____________

Shoot for the moon.  Even if you miss, you'll land among the stars.........
.
.