[MD] The Word is Not the Thing

Wed Sep 16 02:01:16 PDT 2009

John,

I really like reading about the Copenhagen Interpretation, and the follow
up.  I just do...  I don't think I've ever written a word about Deepak
Chopra, I know his name but not much else about him, although I really like
the song he sings with Demi Moore: Desire.  "We will be neighbors in the
stars."  That Lanza says "consciousness conceives, governs, and becomes a
physical world." is interesting.  I can sense a question here, "becomes a
physical world"?  Becomes?  Like a cloud can become an elephant?  And
certainly he doesn't mean a physical world of inherently existenting
objects?  

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: Wednesday, September 16, 2009 1:46 AM
To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
Subject: Re: [MD] The Word is Not the Thing

Marsha,
The really neat thing I like about Wikipedia is how quickly it evolves.  I
went there this morning and found two quotes on responses to Biocentrism
that I bet you'd like that weren't there a month ago...

 Richard Conn Henry, Professor of Physics and Astronomy at Johns Hopkins
University <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johns_Hopkins_University> pointed
out that Lanza's theory is consistent with quantum
mechanics<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_mechanics>,
"What Lanza says in this book is not new. Then why does Robert have to say
it at all? It is because we, the physicists, do NOT say it--or if we do say
it, we only whisper it, and in private--furiously blushing as we mouth the
words. True, yes; politically correct, hell no!"
[15]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biocentrism#cite_note-14>

-------------------

Like that?  I did.  Physicists whispering in private and blushing furiously.
 What an evocative image that makes!

And then an old friend of yours chimed in too...

---------------------

Indian physician and
writer[16]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biocentrism#cite_note-15>
[17] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biocentrism#cite_note-16> Deepak
Chopra<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deepak_Chopra> stated
"Lanza's insights into the nature of consciousness [are] original and
exciting" and that "his theory of biocentrism is consistent with the most
ancient wisdom traditions of the world which says that consciousness
conceives, governs, and becomes a physical world. It is the ground of our
Being in which both subjective and objective reality come into existence."[
18] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biocentrism#cite_note-17>

On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 11:46 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:

> John,
>
> I like all that is described.  But I am still most fascinated by Quality
> experience as simply patterned experience and unpatterned experience. That
> this Quantum Science is on the front edge and creating new patterns is
very
> exciting to read about. I love that there is so much Mystery still there
> and
> you occasionally read sentences like, 'The experiment has been done and it
> works, but we don't know what it means.' That is cutting edge!  From what
> you've posted on Biocentricism it is also front-edge,  theorizing, and
very
> exciting. I'd like to read more about it.  But there is unpatterned
> experience too, with no claims to anything.
>
> I'll be going to Cape Cod for a few days soon.  I'm hoping the book that
> Ian
> suggested, 'Schrodinger's Kittens and the Search for Reality' will arrive
> in
> time to make the trip.
>
>
> Marsha
>
>
>
>  _____________
>
> "He who neglects the present moment throws away all he has."
>   (Friedrich von Schiller)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org
> [mailto:moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org] On Behalf Of John Carl
> Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2009 1:44 PM
> To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
> Subject: Re: [MD] The Word is Not the Thing
>
> Marsha,
> I haven't been talking about Biocentricism lately, but I picture it as
> encapsulating all you describe. Here see how much the MoQ -tweaked version
> you agree with:
>
>
>
>    1. What we perceive as reality is a process that involves
>    our consciousness. An "external" reality, if it existed, would by
> definition
>   have to exist in space. But this is meaningless, because space and time
> are
>   not absolute realities but rather tools of the human and animal mind.
>    2. Our external and internal perceptions are inextricably intertwined.
>    They are different sides of the same coin and cannot be divorced from
> one
>   another.
>    3. The behavior of subatomic particles, indeed all particles and
> objects,
>    is inextricably linked to the presence of an observer. Without the
> presence
>   of a conscious observer, they at best exist in an undetermined state
>   of probability waves.
>    4. Without consciousness, "matter" dwells in an undetermined state
>    of probability. Any universe that could have preceded consciousness
only
>   existed in a probability-state.
>    5.  The universe is fine-tuned for mind-life, which makes perfect sense
>    as mind-life creates the universe, not the other way around. The
> "universe"
>   is simply the complete spatio-temporal logic of the self.
>    6. Time does not have a real existence outside of animal-sense
>    perception. It is the process by which we perceive changes in the
> universe.
>    7. Space, like time, is not an object or a thing. Space is another form
>    of our animal understanding and does not have an independent reality.
We
>   carry space and time around with us like turtles with shells. Thus,
there
> is
>   no absolute self-existing matrix in which physical events occur
> independent
>   of life.
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 12:32 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>
> > Hi Platt,
> >
> > I want to live in the Quantum world.  To me it is the most exciting,
> > MoQ-like place to be.  And it is 'the Mystery' that is most real to me.
> > When a physicist says  the equation to determine particle spin
represents
> > some-thing "real", I want to bombard him with thrown shoes. I seem to be
> > very prejudice and want to toss all talk of William James aside, and
move
> > on
> > to the cutting edge of Quantum Theory and the Philosophy of Science.
> Maybe
> > there is the proper place for the MoQ to be, as a bridge between Eastern
> > Wisdom and Western Knowledge: Quantum Theory and its relationship with
> the
> > Philosophy of Science, and its relationship to Buddhism.
> >
> > Consciousness is another mysterious frontier where a bridge between East
> > and
> > West is needed. Maybe this is what Krimel was trying to explain. -  I
> keep
> > wanting to respond to Ham concerning 'awareness'.  Awareness is the most
> > real thing I experience, but I haven't the foggiest thing to say about
it
> > that doesn't degrade into babble.  I know awareness most from
meditation,
> > but not nearly with the required dedication to speak about it. I want to
> > say
> > something like awareness is where Quality hangs out, and those
> > non-affirming-negative I've grown fond of.
> >
> > You are kind, generous and beautiful, and I love you. You always
> > appropriately bring my head down from the clouds and back to art.
> >
> >
> > Marsha
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org
> > [mailto:moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org] On Behalf Of
> > plattholden at gmail.com
> > Sent: Monday, September 14, 2009 6:40 PM
> > To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
> > Subject: Re: [MD] The Word is Not the Thing
> >
> > Marsha,
> >
> > I like your analogy with quantum physics. The more we become familiar
> > with the MOQ the more it resonates across the cognitive and aesthetic
> > spectrum. Your continuing emphasis on the ineffable spontaneous
> > dynamic flux of reality has influenced my own perspective more than
> > you know. For that much thanks..
> >
> > Platt
> >
> > On 14 Sep 2009 at 17:08, MarshaV wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Platt,
> > >
> > > I like this Platt.  I think of the MoQ as all process until it is
> > > intellectualized, then it collapses into a subject and object.  Just
> like
> > a
> > > photon.  More often than not, you seem correct.
> > >
> > >
> > > Marsha
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org
> > > [mailto:moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org] On Behalf Of
> > > plattholden at gmail.com
> > > Sent: Monday, September 14, 2009 12:01 PM
> > > To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
> > > Subject: [MD] The Word is Not the Thing
> > >
> > > All:
> > >
> > > The great debate about whether the MOQ belongs to the intellectual
> level
> > > or not may have a rather simple solution. It both belongs to the
> > > intellectual
> > > level and it doesn't. As a description of reality it's a static
> > intellectual
> > >
> > > pattern. As the central reality it's Dynamic -- beyond words.
> > >
> > > I've come to this conclusion by reviewing Pirsig's comment in Lila's
> > Child
> > > to
> > > an assertion I made about the MOQ many years ago, namely that "The
> > > MOQ is an SOM document based on SOM reasoning." (and by implication
> > > belonging to the intellectual level). In note 132 Pirsig wrote:
> > >
> > > "It employs SOM reasoning the SOM reasoning employs social structures
> > > such as courts and journals and learned societies to make itself
known.
> > > SOM reasoning is not subordinate to these social structures, and the
> MOQ
> > > is not subordinate to the SOM structures it employs. Remember the
> central
> > > reality of the MOQ is not an object or a subject or anything else. It
> is
> > > understood by direct experience only and not by reasoning of any
> kind.".
> > >
> > > Or, as my old college textbook on semantics says, "The word is not the
> > > thing."  A map is not the territory, a menu is not the food, a
pointing
> > > finger
> > > is not the moon.
> > >
> > > Obvious? Of course. But I easily forget. I forget the independence of
> > > symbols from the experiences symbolized. I fail to remember that the
> > > differences between actual and symbolic experience are great. I am not
> at
> > > risk of being killed by watching a movie like "The Longest Day;" I
> don't
> > > feel
> > > the cold while reading about the Antarctic.
> > >
> > > And so it is with the MOQ. It's intellectual pattern contained in ZAMM
> > and
> >
> > > Lila  is the map at the intellectual level.  Dynamic quality
experience
> > is
> > > the
> > > territory. Many focus on the former and call it the MOQ. Bo focuses on
> > the
> >
> > > latter and calls it the MOQ. Like the heads and tails of a coin, both
> are
> > > right.
> > >
> > > Here we battle over interpreting the map. At the same time as we write
> to
> > > express our views, we  engage Dynamic quality.
> > >
> > > I'm sure others have reached this conclusion before and may have
> > > presented it here. For me sometimes  the dawning comes late.
> > >
> > > As always, I could be wrong.
> > >
> > > Platt
> > >
> >
> > 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/
>
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/