[MD] Is this the inadequacy of the MOQ?

[MarshaV]

On Nov 30, 2010, at 11:08 PM, rapsncows at fastmail.fm wrote:

> Marsha,
> a question first,
> Tim
> 
> On Tue, 30 Nov 2010 01:45:50 -0500, "MarshaV" <valkyr at att.net> said:
>> 
>> Hi Tim,
>> 
>> Do you have a problem with describing the self, the 'I', as an 
>> ever-changing, interrelated, impermanent collection of flowing 
>> inorganic, biological, social and intellectual static patterns of value?  
>> As opposed to an independent existing, controlling center that runs 
>> the show?
>> 
>> 
>> Marsha 
>> 
> 
> [Tim]
> I want to ask about the word 'collection'.  I started typing up a long
> reply before I realized that I was giving short shrift to your use of
> that word; and I know you to be precise about words, especially in a
> situation like this.  I think if you would have said 'flowing collection
> of...' I would have seen a sufficient emphasis on 'collection', but as
> it is I wonder if it is more just a linguistically necessary term.  For
> me, the amazing thing about the 'I' is taht it survives the utter
> present of DQ.  THe collection is not casual; there is some
> not-so-changing consistency through it all.

Marsha:
Collection - many - one's static value history.

Please described  that not-so-changing consistency?  I have never 
found it such.  


> [Tim]
> there is still a little nit that I picked before, regarding 'flowing':
> that this might be too restrictive a term; But I think this is off topic
> now.

Marsha:
Flowing is an analogy.  What word do you prefer.   


> [Tim] 
> also, while I'm at it, I wonder why you have both 'ever-changing' and
> 'impermanent', specifically, why do you insist on the latter?

Marsha:
A pattern event is always different, from individual to individual, across 
time, and within the DQ field.  Granted time and space and change are 
givens, but I don't know how to talk without assuming them.  I suppose 
that's the difficulty with discussing superposition and entanglement too,   
The concepts are beyond our metaphysical assumptions and linguistic 
rules.  And why I get frustrated speaking of unpatterned experiences.   

Impermanent because an experience/event has a beginning, a middle 
and an end.  


> Anyway, to hint at my answer, even if I don't end up 'having a problem'
> with your description, I think I will prefer one that mentions 'choice'
> and 'will', as I see these as the two most vital prerogatives of the
> 'I'.  Further, it is not the static patterns that choose and will, nor
> is it so much the 'collection'... where do choice and will come from in
> your description?

Choice?  Like in freewill?  Do you want choice in every event?  Do you 
want to choose when to breath?  What category of choice do you prefer 
to make?  How many possible mental events happen in a minute?   

For me, awareness allows influencing an event.  


> And about what you opposed your description with (in connection with
> your description): mu.

Nothing to say in opposition to someone's mu.  These are not easy 
issues.  



> 
> Tim


Marsha