[MD] Betternes - 4 levels of!

[118]

Hi dmb,
>
Thank you for patiently answering at least some of my questions.  I will
proceed on more specific sincere questions that are not meant to attack but
just to clarify what your understanding is.  I do not think that we see
theism in the same way, and this may be the crux of the problem.  To me It
would appear that you are talking about religion.  I have the same negative
concept of the institute of religion as perhaps you do.  Theism is not the
rigid control over people that the church often expresses.  It is a stated
belief system that is personal.  It does not need the dogma of religion and
can be arrived at through philosophical inquiry.  It provides meaning,
purpose, and liberation.

[dmb]

Believe in nothing? Huh?
> The MOQ is a form of radical empiricism and Quality is the primary
> empirical reality. Experience is the starting point and the most basic
> premise is that experience and reality amount to the same thing.


[Mark]
 If you base your starting point on experience, and that experience is
reality, is the experience of desire real or outside of that empiricism?
 Are them some experiences that are not considered as empirical?  Does
Quality incorporate happiness, loneliness, hunger, fear, into its framework?

You seem to be suggesting that the experience of God is not empirical, but
something else.  If so, how would you know if you haven't experienced it,
but others have?  What measurement are you using for experience that differs
with Quality to separate it from Theism?  This seems a rational and direct
question that is clear enough to me.  I would ask for a rational answer how
the experience of God is does not fit in with your radical empiricism.  If
you choose to delete this question in your answer, then you are being
deceptive.

 Are you basing the philosophy simply on what is sensed by the five senses,
and has no say on what is experience beyond those?  If so, how does Quality
become empirical?  Are you suggesting that betterness is measurable
empirically and that we can point to it?  What is the difference between
sensing betterness and sensing God?  Again these are clear questions which
simply ask you to define the sensing of experience which is at the heart of
radical empiricism and how it applies to Quality but not to God.  I am not
obfuscating or deliberately misleading, I am honestly trying to understand
your beliefs only because they seem to me to be irrational.  That is just
the opinion I have so far, I would like to be corrected.

>
> [dmb says]:
> Well, I already did that. That's what you're responding to. I offered an
> explanation of the MOQ's position with respect to theism and mysticism and I
> used quotes to support and further clarify that explanation. If you really
> were seeking clarification, you would have asked questions that were far
> more specific and sincere.
>

[Mark]
Again, what I am saying here is sincere.  There are many comments from your
post concerning a person's personal understanding which I do see as
rationally derived.  Many mystical experiences are through the apprehension
of theism, such as Meister Eckhart.  Is he a platypus?  Perhaps a more
direct question would be:  Provide some criteria which separate the
metaphysics of quality from theistic belief.  I would suggest that they both
contain a single overriding entity.  Both can be experienced prior to
thought.  Both provide meaning to existence.  Both can be derived
philosophically or rationally.  Both cannot be strictly conceptualized and
rely on individual experience.

I sense that an alternative to theism is being proposed.  Something which is
more fulfilling than what people have found in the past.  Are there rational
arguments to support this increase in direct personal relevance?  If so,
could you provide a couple?

>
> [dmb]

How can a reasonable person interpret things so "differently" that a simple
> declarative sentence like "the MOQ is atheistic" could be construed to mean
> that the MOQ is not atheistic. How can a reasonable person conclude that
> Pirsig's view could be compatible with anything that he's described as an
> "evil social suppression"? That's pretty strong strong language, you know,
> not just some little hint. A reasonable interpreter would not and could not
> miss that. Are these among the quotes you interpret "differently"? You have
> my sympathy Mark, but I see no reason to give you credit as a thinker or a
> reader. Quite the opposite.
>

dmb, I find your interpretation of some things very difficult to understand.
 Perhaps you have an awareness that I do not.  I simply ask you to present
it to me, not just say that you have it.  I believe that if we both read a
passage from the Christian bible, or Dante, we would not agree even though
we are reading the same words.

I hear you say that the MOQ is atheistic, my question is what do you mean?
 I do not know how else to put it.  Again, I do not comprehend how theism is
an evil social suppression, or what exactly is meant by that.  This is why I
ask for claification, if RMP said that, then why?  If anything. my
experience is that people who find God become liberated.  A sense of freedom
and happiness results from meaning and purpose.  What is being suppressed by
a personal awareness of theism?  Does social suppression result from these
beliefs?

Again, I would understand your belief if you are speaking about dogmatic
religion that sends soldiers off to long wars for purposes of land and
power.  As such, MOQ should be said to be anti-religion of the kind which
kills people, and molests young boys.  This would be more specific than the
general statement we are speaking of, which begs the question of Theism.

Take a minute before you respond, I am seeking clarity.

Thank you for your patience with this student of MOQ.  I am sure your
answers will help clarify MOQ for others as well.

Mark

>
>
>
>
> 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
>