[MD] What is Zen?

[david buchanan]

Mary said to dmb:
I find this such an extraordinarily strange post.  Mainly because I have no idea who you believe yourself to be arguing with, or what, in fact, you are arguing about. ... If you believe we _do not_ agree with the quotes, then you fail to understand what we have been saying all along, and if you believe we _do_ agree with them, then what was the purpose of presenting them couched in terms that imply that in some manner we should be 'chastened'?  As I said, this post of yours is bizarre.


dmb said:

It's funny. I was trying to explain that I get frustrated when my explanations have no effect and your response to that shows that my explanations have no effect. Please imagine that I screaming and pulling my hair out. It's frustrating because the quotes I posted contradict Bo's equation. They're suppose to help you see that you have the wrong idea about "SOM" and "intellect".


I'm SHOWING you that other philosophers reject subject-object metaphysics. By taking a look at some of their conversations we can see more exactly what it is, exactly, that is being rejected. Those quotes should have persuaded you that SOM is not what you think it is. See, if you understand what SOM is, then you will no longer be able to believe that it is equal to the intellectual level. When you see what the actual problem is, then Bo's equation will lose all it's appeal. Then you'll see that the whole idea is not even worthy of debate. I hope that someday you'll look back at these opinions, disagree with your former self and feel proud that you've grown.   		 	   		  
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail has tools for the New Busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your inbox.
http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_1