[MD] atheistic and content

[John Carl]

I think I agree Marsha,

(not that you asked me)

If by the "I" you mean THE thing and by the "individual" "A"  thing.

For an "I" takes itself as ultimate and ignores the contextual truth of its
being, but an individual is just this instance of a being-in-context that
experiences itself as experience.

If that makes any sense, then I think we agree.

John

On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 9:25 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:

>
> On Mar 14, 2010, at 11:54 PM, Ham Priday wrote:
>
> >
> > You know this as well as I do, Marsha.  So, why should I waste my time
> proving that you exist?  Maybe I just like to make you giggle ;-).
> >
>
>
> Greetings Ham,
>
> How about if I concede a bit.  I might consider there is individual
> experience/existing, but it is not anything like an independent, controlling
> self who is in-charge of its experiences.  It would be more like seeing
> would be unique from your individual eyes and point-of-view, and different
> then the experience of seeing from my individual eyes and point-of-view.
>  But still no self.  This is always where I want to agree with you.   So
> that's no to the 'I', but yes to the individual.   What would you say about
> this?
>
>
>  Marsha
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ___
>
>
> 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
>