[MD] BioCentrism: Was Zeno correct?

[ADRIE KINTZIGER]

The Moq and Time, Mc Watt commenting on Pirsig's point of view
towards Parmenides and Zeno,

(extract)
On the other hand, from the Dynamic sense of the MOQ, Parmenides is,
strictly speaking, correct as the concept of ‘change’ is an abstraction from
Dynamic Quality and, therefore, (as with anything abstracted) doesn’t exist
in an absolute sense.   Possibly, the koan-like theories of Parmenides and
"Zeno" indicate (and they may have shared similar thinking to Zen masters
for such verbal conundrums) ""the error of assigning absolute truth to a
static concept when reality is fundamentally dynamic. ""
(end)


Can you pay attention to the endconclusion?, the endsentence.

on the same page, quote Mc Watt,

*"Any physical theory is always provisional, in the sense that it is only a
hypothesis: you can never prove it.  No matter how many times the results of
an experiment agree with some theory, you can never be sure that the next
time the result will not contradict the theory. *
And tends to support Pirsig’s caution about assigning anything objective as
an absolute reality independent from any observer."


again pay attention to the endformulation, ..(Zeno conflicts with everything
by assuming reality to be independent from the observer,as an "absolute")

This is also to conflict Einstein,Hawking and about 95 % of science and
scientifical evidence.

(i have the material to roll in Hawking's opinion if you like)

Adrie


2010/11/7 MarshaV <valkyr at att.net>

>
> On Nov 7, 2010, at 7:08 AM, ADRIE KINTZIGER wrote:
>
> > Hi, Marsha, it means only this, importing Zeno in the moq is not a good
> > idea.
> > better that it is told to you before it fires in your hands.
>
> Please explain why?
>
>
> >
> > Nobody owns the truth.
> > we cannot have reality blurred with occultism.
> > dont get me wrong , i like mysticism, occultism, but do not make a widget
> > out of it.
> > Okay?
>
>
>
>
>
> >
> > 2010/11/7 MarshaV <valkyr at att.net>
> >
> >>
> >> Adrie,
> >>
> >> Although I think that quantum physics represents the West's most
> >> dynamic, cutting-edge science, what I find most interesting are the
> >> enigmas, paradoxes and anomalies because they most likely are
> >> the weak spots that may shatter the deep-seated belief in scientific
> >> materialism.  Einstein and Hawking have offered ever-changing,
> >> relational, impermanent intellectual static patterns of value, not the
> >> Absolute Truth.   Space-time and wormholes are conceptually
> >> constructed patterns overlaid onto a flow of Dynamic Quality.  So
> >> citing Anthony citing Einstein and Hawking to bolster your opinion
> >> that the BioCentrism article was wrong, means what?
> >>
> >>
> >> 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
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > parser
> > 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
>



-- 
parser