[MD] re marscha question

[MarshaV]

Hello Adrie,

Ah yes, Lila...  I still think the best understanding of Reality/Quality(Dynamic&static)
 is found in Lila's words:

 "...I'm whatever your questions turn me into. You don't see that. It's your 
questions that make me who I am. If you think I'm an angel then that's 
what I am. If you think I'm a whore then that's what I am. I'm whatever 
you think. And if you change your mind about me then I change too. 
So whatever Richard tells you, it's true. There's no way he can lie about me."     

Reality is whatever you think it is, not whatever you want it to be, but 
whatever you think it to be.  There's no way you can lie about it, and if 
you change your understanding of reality, then reality changes too.   

When I read her words I  recognized the profound truth in them.  Bless Mr. Pirsig 
for being Lila's interpreter.  

---

You wrote "stating my case , marscha, i have no case , but all cases are mine, 
i'm a seeker of clarity, crisp and clear images,of someones thinking,... but no 
Pheadrus.  But things we say , need to be true."  

Do you mean one needs to be honest?  Or that one needs to speak only what 
is true?  To what extent can patterns be true?  

 
Marsha





On Apr 15, 2010, at 9:10 AM, Fam. Kintziger-Karaca wrote:

> No single part of the moq can be a stand alone entity, or exist without al other components.
> There can be no painting without a painter, artist , or paint.
> Even the objective observer is needed, to view the painting.
> ask me in a simplified example.., wich part of my wife i like most , i can answer,maybe, her hair,or her hands.
> 
> But can i expirience benefits solely by owning her hands , or hair...? no, i need all parts to expirience
> the total image.No components have any stand-alone capacities.
> 
> But i value your question, marscha, as a friendly door opener for my to state my case.
> i have no case , i try to be an objective observer,i try to learn, try to feed my intellect, by examining
> the toughts of spirits , thinkers , examiners.
> These dont need to be academics,or writers.The thinking of a lister can be of more importance to me than some worn-out
> out academics point of view.
> needless to say ,of course, that i do not oppose to any academic in general.
> çI'm reading "The genius and the goddes "(Huxley), right now, trying to use the intellect of Huxley's abstractions
> in my understanding of "lila"..(the novelle within the stated definition of quality).
> Understanding "lila"(the figure), as partially maybe the alter-ego Pheadrus in disguise...., and partially "lila"(caracter) 
> as the ..goddes,supporting the intellect, the genius of the writer.
> 
> I think i can make a very nice abstraction regarding to the previus said, maybe if i have some spare time left over i will do so.
> 
> Or can this be a question for the listers, being "lila"(the caracter) Pirsigs alter-ego in disguise?
> 
> regards, Adrie
> 
> and for bodvar , ofcourse, i need to listen to your case.
> 
> regards, Adrie
> 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/md/archives.html


 
___