[MD] Speed of Lighting, Roar of thunder...

[David Thomas]

On 8/22/10 10:08 AM, "MarshaV" <valkyr at att.net> wrote:

>>> Marsha:
>>> Patterns existing "outside our concepts of them" seems to make it a SOM
>>> issue,
>>> but I could be wrong.  Do patterns exist as independent entities?
>> [Dave]
>> Depends. If you want to looked at them universally then, no. All patterns
>> are parts of smaller and larger patterns such that ultimately all is one.
>> 
>> But this is not very helpful idea when trying to make breakfast.
> Marsha
> I don't know about you, buy I don't metaphysically scramble eggs.
> I just fix them.
> 
>> [Dave]
>> The belief  that supping on the concept of a egg is the same as dining on
>> "independent entity" egg in your refrigerator, will eventually will lead to
>> the
>> demise of the pattern Marsha.
> Marsha
> I fix eggs, chop wood and carry water.
> 
>> [Dave]
>> Pragmatism would say, "Yes, that it is reasonable thing
>> to believe their really is an "outside world out there" until a better way
>> of understanding that experience comes along."
> Marsha
> I don't even make a determination if an egg is pragmatically
> believable, or not, while I am preparing one.
> 
>> [Dave]
>> But there hasn't been one to date. It leaves open the possibility
>> that all is illusion, but suggests it would not be prudent to act as
>> if this is true.
> Marsha
> While discussing the MoQ, it is most appropriate to question the nature
> static patterns of value.  If static patterns of value present all that can
> be conceptualized, where 'outside our concepts' do they exist?
> 
[Dave]
Most of what you say above is parroting "Zen Talk." Prior to being to
exposed to it, however you where, in the context of the question you asked
and my response, you would have considered this affected babble. I still do.

> Marsha
> seems to make it a SOM issue,

[Dave]
What you really would like to have said was, "SOL issue." Given your longing
for and belief in Bo's ideas yes this is an "issue" for you. Pirsig claims
the MoQ is perfectly compatible with scientific realism.
You know, like the idea that world will keep going around without you, or
me, or  concepts like patterns of quality.

A while back I caught a brief clip of the Dali Lama in an interview where
the reporter ask him about Buddhism's denial of self. The glint in his eyes
and the gruffness in his voice said more than his words. He said something
to the effect,  Who is the stupid ass who claims this. What do you change if
you do not change yourself. I would have loved to seen the look on the
reporter's face. A real life version of the ending to the whole series of
guru on the mountaintop jokes.

Dave

> 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