[MD] the MoRaT

[X Acto]

And since it seems we can say anything we want to

I want to introduce MoRaT

The metaphysics of rape and torture

Pirsig clearly supports this in my interpretation

that rape and torture are morally superior.

" 
"Now Phaedrus felt it all around him - the speed, the height, the crowds and 
their tension. 

All the early strangeness was gone now. He was in it.
He remembered that its great symbol used to be the ticker tape, ticking out 
unpredictable
 fortunes rising and falling every second, a great symbol of luck. Luck. When E. 
B. White
 wrote, 'If you want to live in New York you should be willing to be lucky,' he 
meant not just
 'lucky' but willing to be lucky - that is, Dynamic. If you cling to some set 
static pattern, 

when opportunity comes you won't take it. You have to hang loose, and when the 
time 

comes to be lucky, then be lucky: that's Dynamic.
 
clearly pirsig means "ass rape" when he uses the term "lucky"
 
but he will not admit it. Pirsig states that we must seize the opportunity to 
rape
and torture at every opportunity. 
 
This is the real MoQ
 
The one Pirsig meant
 it is so obviouse
 
the rest of you morons refuse to discuss the 
one true MoQ, the MoRaT interpetation.
 
-Ro
 
 
 
 
 


 


----- Original Message ----
From: X Acto <xacto at rocketmail.com>
To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
Sent: Mon, July 19, 2010 8:50:26 AM
Subject: Re: [MD] inorganic patterns & thinking

Since the theory is "nothing is real"
test that theory by standing in traffic
or jumping off a building.

see what happens

please


 


----- Original Message ----
From: Magnus Berg <McMagnus at home.se>
To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
Sent: Mon, July 19, 2010 7:24:25 AM
Subject: Re: [MD] inorganic patterns & thinking

On 2010-07-19 11:17, MarshaV wrote:
> Sight at its very least is not about identified objects, only form and
> color.  But one can experience sight sans even form and color too.
> It is ALL conceived.  It's useful and I wouldn't throw away any but the
> arrogance of thinking the "real" has been realized.

Arrogance is there in SOM, yes, because in SOM, there's no other relationship 
between the perceived object in your head and the object observed.

But in MoQ, we know that there *is* a direct dependency from our internal image 
of the object, to the reality of the object via the levels. I'm not saying that 
your brain is supported by *that* stone, but I'm saying that your brain is 
supported by inorganic patterns just *like* a stone.

So, in SOM, ALL is conceived. But in MoQ, where we have the level dependency and 

know that our internal "minds" are supported by inorganic patterns, we can know 
that there are inorganic patterns. From there, I don't think it's arrogant 
anymore to give the stone a status of real.

    Magnus
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