[MD] The Level of Intellectual Quality

[John Carl]

I hear ya, Marsha.  Jalapeno Ice Cream isn't your taste but you won't knock
the spoon outta somebody else's mouth.

Fair enough.

I'm only slightly curious why a system which extolls "Varieties" of
Religious Experience would get its panties all in a twist in the first
place, but hey.  That's just me and my Jalapeno flavored world view.

Yours,

John

On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 10:18 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:

>
> JC,
>
> I disagree with you, but I'm not trying to change your mind.  I think the
> concept
> chocked full of harmful vibes, but by all means go for it.  Let the show
> begin.
> I'll wander through the stadium getting rich selling moon pie.
>
> Love you,
>     Marsha
>
>
>
> On Mar 9, 2010, at 11:49 AM, John Carl wrote:
>
> >>
> >>
> >> And I think the use of the term "god" much more degrading because of the
> >> commonly acknowledged definitions, connotations and history.  I think
> RMP
> >> chose the most appropriate label.  Stripping the word "god" of all the
> >> garbage
> >> would be near impossible, imho.
> >>
> >>
> > I dunno Marsha.  It has been tried before.  There seems to me to be a
> > central problem in human history that when you throw out "God", you throw
> > out values.  That's the way it's been.  The Russian experiment (remember
> the
> > "godless commies?") didn't work out so well and historically, the use of
> the
> > term has served the evolution of society so that evidently those
> societies
> > that use the term do better than the societies that don't.  I feel rather
> > than tossing it out, the MoQ should analyze.
> >
> >
> >
> >>
> >>>
> >>> That's not the same thing as true atheism.  Which is more along the
> lines
> >>> Krimel advocated with the world and all that is being the product of
> >> random
> >>> chance, with no positive force behind any of it.  No matter what you
> call
> >>> it.
> >>
> >> Here's the definition of atheism I use:  Atheists are people who believe
> >> that god
> >> or gods (or other supernatural beings) are man-made constructs, myths
> and
> >> legends or who believe that these concepts are not meaningful.  If
> Krimel
> >> has
> >> a more esoteric, sophisticated definition that's fine but it would seem
> to
> >> narrow
> >> the discussion to only those individuals who share his definition.
> >>
> >>
> > Ok Marsha.  Let's look at this carefully.  "man-made constructs" - what
> > isn't?  Even to use the term implies a supernatural entity, otherwise
> "man"
> > - made is meaningless.
> >
> > Unless you meant gender-wise and you prefer "woman-made constructs".
> >
> > It's like gav pointed out about "Freedom" is also a man-made construct,
> but
> > in the MoQ, even subjective patterns have meaning AS patterns of value.
> > Since people have gone to war repeatedly over such intellectual
> constructs,
> > I fail to see how defining them as "meaningless" is helpful in analyzing
> > them properly.
> >
> >
> >>> I agree that one does not need faith to perceive Quality, whereas it
> does
> >>> take a sort of faith to perceive God.  Just one more way that Quality
> and
> >>> God are differing concepts.  I guess the purest way I can make the
> >>> distinction is that you can ask if God is any good, but you can't
> really
> >> ask
> >>> if Quality is any good.  God is measured by Quality, not the other way
> >>> around.
> >>>
> >>> Does that make sense?
> >>
> >>
> >> Perfect sense.  So what is benefit of holding on to the concept of God?
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Communication with 95% of US Population, for one.  Discourse with most of
> > written history, for another.  Those two alone hold enough benefit to
> tempt
> > me to go all, "duh!" on you.
> >
> > But I won't because I'm too respectful.
> >
> > Quality doesn't obviate God.  Quality tames "God".  The comparison with
> SOM
> > is exactly apt  - Quality doesn't obviate S/O.  Quality tames S/O.
> >
> >
> >
> > John the lion-tamer,
> > 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
>