[MD] The whole yin yang thing

[MarshaV]

On Aug 27, 2010, at 5:15 PM, John Carl wrote:

> Marsha,
> 
> It seems to me if the MoQ can't extricate us out of the mire of relativism,
> we're gonna be really stuck.  I think it does get us out by encouraging us
> to keep trying.  Since we both take as given that Quality is real, we both
> have hope of realizing it in unison when we come across it or create it via
> dialogue.


John,

What you state as "the mire of relativism", I experience as 
everything-is-connected-to-everything, which is also expressed 
in the words "no this, not that'. 


Marsha












> 
> On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 1:13 PM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
> 
>> John,
>> 
>> Isn't your system based on correcting faulty reasoning?   Whether
>> yes or no, where would insight, feeling, intuition and esthetics
>> fit into this process?  Feels right to me may never feel right to you,
>> but then you might claim victory based on rationality.   Where is
>> the irrational or superrational a part of the system?
>> 
>> 
> 
> Victory?  The object of a finite game is to win, but this game is in no way
> finite or limitable.  It's intrinsically an infinite interpretation.
> 
> The way I think feelings and intuition fit into the process, is that we
> experience such, and then share that experience with each other.  Sometimes,
> my experience doesn't translate easily.  But with time and effort, I think
> most any feeling or intuition can be shared verbally.  I know what you mean,
> about the feeling itself, but really we're not trying to feel each other's
> feelings.  We're trying to understand each other's intellectual
> understandings of our feelings.
> 
> Of course, intellect is just a small part of our human experience.  But
> nevertheless, it's an important aspect and worthy of the attempt to get it
> right.  And even with its limitations we have no other way of communicating.
> 
> Doesn't that seem right to you?
> 
> John
> 
> PS: I take it you meant "how very rational" in a derogatory way then.
> Criticism of using rationality doesn't make any more sense to me than
> criticism of my use of English or my use of interpretation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> I can accept that my interpretation is invalid because it's lazy and
>>>>> cliched.    I can't accept its invalid simply because it's an
>>>>> interpretation.
>>>>> 
>>>>> To me, the process has to go like this: I project, you correct.  You
>>>>> project, I correct.  We keep going till it feels right.  We don't quit
>>>> just
>>>>> because it feels wrong.
>>>>> 
>>>>> John
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> How very rational!
>>>> 
>>>> Marsha
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 11:34 PM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> John,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I reject your interpretations here.  Your conclusions seem to me like
>>>> lazy
>>>>>> cliche.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> ___
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 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
>>>> 
>>> 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
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> 
>> 
>> 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
>> 
> 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


 
___