[MD] SQ is the illusion

[Ian Glendinning]

Hi John, I agree with your caveat ....

Again just a terminological problem here.
I was using "reality" and "impressions" in a GOF rational SOMist
sense. Misleading if we presume these interpretations to be some
objective reality, whereas in fact they are precisely created /
creative to suit our human (scale and timescale) purposes. Misleading
to think otherwise.

On Sun, Aug 29, 2010 at 11:04 PM, John Carl <ridgecoyote at gmail.com> wrote:
> Well Ian, I've gotten glimpses of this from you before, and it always has,
> and still does make good sense to me.  Except I'd take issue somewhat with
> your last statement.
>
> On Sun, Aug 29, 2010 at 9:02 AM, Ian Glendinning
> <ian.glendinning at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Interesting John,
>>
>> My process view says all is dynamic, static patterns are simply
>> sufficiently slow moving for long enough to be noticed .... species.
>> The error is to treat those named patterns as objects more real than
>> the dynamics - mostly chaotic - from which they fleetingly emerge (for
>> a few seconds or a few aeons). They are patterns simply because they
>> are noticably less chaotic.
>>
>> The human perspective (of scale and time, and intellect hanging off
>> the fourth floor balcony) gives us misleading impressions of stable
>> reality.
>>
>>
> I'm not sure how "misleading" our impressions of reality are.  Might they
> actually be creative?  That's the intriguing premise of Biocentrism, and
> there's a lot that jives with the MoQ in that I'd say.
>
>
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> John
>
>
>
>>
>> On Sun, Aug 29, 2010 at 4:49 PM, John Carl <ridgecoyote at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > People talk about DQ like its so mysterious and ineffable, but really
>> it's
>> > SQ that's completely incomprehensible and mysterious.  Nothing is really
>> > static, but it all seems like it is in the moment.  What's up with that?
>> > Underlying substance is more unreal than real.  Patterns only exist in a
>> > constantly shifting cosmos, with everything always in flux from moment to
>> > moment.  Static?  What's static?
>> >
>> > According to Magnus, the one and zeros of a machine.  The cold, rational
>> > precision of logic.  That is, our own rational systems. But these are
>> > unreal.  The real world pulls plugs, zaps with cosmic rays and turns to
>> rust
>> > in time.
>> >
>> > Meanwhile, the ongoing Quality which causes us to create the world in our
>> > heads, it's so plain and obvious and unchanging.  So unmysterious and
>> > evident.
>> >
>> >  But everybody wants to believe that  SQ exists.  They want to feel that
>> > reality is  stable.  Even though we know it's not.   What is it with you
>> > people and your static cling?
>> > 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
>