[MD] MOQ and the Future: An Inquiry into Usefulness

[markhsmit at aol.com]

I agree, Arlo, with the statement below.  Which brings up the Buddhist
question: Does a dog have Buddha (DQ) nature?

Mark

[Arlo] 
Well, the MOQ says that intellectual patterns are the most moral of the stable patterns of value, but that serving DQ (which I presume you associate with The Tao) entails "killing all intellectual patterns" (which I read as detaching oneself from one's conceptualizations). 



-----Original Message-----
From: Arlo Bensinger <ajb102 at psu.edu>
To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
Sent: Mon, Nov 16, 2009 12:19 pm
Subject: Re: [MD] MOQ and the Future: An Inquiry into Usefulness


[Mark] 
I'm not sure what you mean by this last comment. Taoism is not theist in any way. There is no supreme intelligent being. Taoism is a metaphysical philosophy on being, just in the same way MoQ is. 
 
[Arlo] 
I understand this. My concern had only do to with misinterpretation and/or misrepresentation. 
 
[Mark] 
The difference lies in that Taoism does not suppose a significant quality to the intelligence of man. 
 
[Arlo] 
I'm not an expert on Taoism (although I did stay at a Holiday Inn Exprss last night), but this sounds wrong to me. Maybe Taoism does not place significant quality on "intellect", as it is a more experiential understanding. 
 
[Mark] 
MoQ does just this, which is fine if we are to discuss our place in the universe. 
 
[Arlo] 
Well, the MOQ says that intellectual patterns are the most moral of the stable patterns of value, but that serving DQ (which I presume you associate with The Tao) entails "killing all intellectual patterns" (which I read as detaching oneself from one's conceptualizations). 
 
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/