[MD] Emptiness & Quantum Mechancics

MarshaV valkyr at att.net
Wed Oct 6 12:06:30 PDT 2010 

Hi Mark,

There is to deepen one's understanding of both Quality and Emptiness, 
both rationally and through experience.  I am not a Buddhist.  I am an 
MoQ'ist.   Yet the MoQ has given me insights into Buddhism, and 
Buddhism has given me insights into the MoQ.  Many paths, remember?
I had a history with yoga and Vedic texts, especially one by Patanjali.    
There are also areas in quantum physics that seem to add a new and 
important dimension.  My quest complete?  Heavens no!!!   But be it 
the MoQ or Buddhism, I do fall back on the fact that the MoQ is Reality 
equals Quality(unpatterned experience/patterned experience,) and these 
discussions are patterns of value, and ultimately represent not this, not that.  


Marsha




On Oct 6, 2010, at 2:37 PM, 118 wrote:

> Hi Marsha,
> 
> Hard to understand from this distance, I don't even know if you are real...
> 
> By saying that Quality and Emptiness are synonymous, what else is there to
> say?  There is plenty of literature, ritual, and lifestyle based on
> Emptiness.  So, I don't think you can get away with an RMP statement that
> easily.  If we are talking Buddhism, then you have finished your quest.  Me,
> I will continue building some strange structure.
> 
> IMHO
> Mark
> 
> On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 8:50 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Mark,
>> 
>> I expected that it would be understood to be a response to our posted
>> exchange.  You, if I remember correctly brought up the subject of
>> "many paths."  (Btw, in Ant's PhD, he(Anthony) mentions that RMP
>> claims that Quality and Emptiness are synonyms.)  I really didn't see
>> that there was a more appropriate response to be made.  And yes,
>> it was meant "all in good fun."
>> 
>> 
>> Marsha
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Oct 6, 2010, at 11:30 AM, 118 wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Marsha,
>>> What did you expect?  We have some pretty rigorous definitionists
>> patrolling
>>> the posts.  For what it's worth, I liked it.  All in good fun.
>>> Mark
>>> 
>>> On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 11:22 PM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Mark,
>>>> 
>>>> I thought it just a sweet haiku indicating that each individual has
>>>> their own path.  Sorry it became something else.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Marsha
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Oct 6, 2010, at 1:25 AM, 118 wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Yea, I agree DMB, relativity is a pretty useless concept.  Now
>>>>> relationalism, that is a whole 'nother story.  And I'm not talking
>> about
>>>> the
>>>>> opposite of absolutism, I'm talkin' Quality.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I don't have any relatives that are dwarfs, so I can't comment on
>>>> Marsha's
>>>>> giant.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Mark
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 1:11 PM, david buchanan <dmbuchanan at hotmail.com
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Marsha said:
>>>>>> RELATIVITY:
>>>>>> the tallest dwarf
>>>>>> meeting the smallest giant
>>>>>> - same size
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> dmb says:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> No, that's not what relativity means. Relativity means there is no
>>>> standard
>>>>>> by which to measure things like truth and moral values.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> What you have above is merely three sets of relations.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The dwarf is tallest in relation to other dwarves.
>>>>>> The giant is the smallest when compared to other giants.
>>>>>> In relation to each other, the dwarf and the giant are the same size.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> As a practical matter, these relations do not depend on one's
>>>> perspective
>>>>>> or worldview. It just depends on whether or not you can get all the
>>>> dwarfs
>>>>>> and giants to stand next to a measuring tape. That's how you know
>> you've
>>>> got
>>>>>> the tallest dwarf in the first place. That's how you know all other
>>>> giants
>>>>>> are bigger. These are quantifiable facts and all three sets of
>> relations
>>>> are
>>>>>> true at the same time without contradiction. The term "relative" can
>> be
>>>> used
>>>>>> to mean "in relation to" or "by comparison with" but that doesn't have
>>>>>> anything to do with the objectionable philosophical stance known as
>>>>>> relativism. If we say the dwarf is relatively tall, we don't mean his
>>>> height
>>>>>> cannot be determined or that his height depends on one's understanding
>>>> of
>>>>>> the term "tall".
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Words and concepts are relational in a similar way. As I like to point
>>>> out,
>>>>>> the meaning of the terms "static" and "dynamic" is relational in the
>>>> sense
>>>>>> that "static" means the opposite of dynamic and "Dynamic" means the
>>>> opposite
>>>>>> of static. The meaning of each term is depends on not being the other,
>>>> the
>>>>>> same way hot and cold or short and tall define each other by
>> opposition.
>>>>>> Words also derive their meaning by virtue of their relation to context
>>>> in
>>>>>> which the term is being used. "Tall" can mean "highly exaggerated"
>> when
>>>>>> we're talking about tales, it can refer to the shape of a cocktail
>> glass
>>>>>> when talking to a bartender, it can mean "difficult" when we're
>> talking
>>>>>> about tall orders and tall obstacles. It can refer to a proud posture
>> or
>>>>>> walking style as well as actual height. Many words are very flexible
>> and
>>>>>> have many different meanings depending on the context but again this
>> is
>>>> to
>>>>>> say that meaning is relational, not relative to the user. Words mean
>>>> what
>>>>>> they mean in relation to oth
>>>>>> er words and in relation to the context in which it's being used. In
>>>> other
>>>>>> words, we can't isolate the meaning of a term because it derives it's
>>>>>> meaning from the whole language system. This is the net of jewels idea
>>>>>> applied to words. Similarly, some philosophers talk about our "web" of
>>>>>> beliefs. This image get across the idea that some concepts are more
>>>> central
>>>>>> than others, which is probably true.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Compared to the top of Mount Everest and the tallest short guy, the
>>>> Empire
>>>>>> State Building is shorter and taller at the same time. These are not
>>>>>> relative truths or opposed claims or two different views. It's merely
>>>> two
>>>>>> different comparisons, two different facts. The building is never
>> going
>>>> to
>>>>>> be taller than the mountain and it'll never be shorter than any
>> person,
>>>> not
>>>>>> even the tallest giant. I don't mean to be some kind of yard-stick
>>>>>> fundamentalist. I'm just saying that relations are just as real as
>>>> anything
>>>>>> else and it's a part of what it means for something to be true and
>>>> right.
>>>>>> This could be called relationalism or relationism or wholism or
>>>>>> contextualism or situationalism. But relativity or relativism is
>>>> something
>>>>>> else entirely. It's the philosophical equivalent of combining
>> halitosis
>>>> with
>>>>>> leprosy.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 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
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> ___
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 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
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> 
>> 
>> 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


 
___

More information about the Moq_Discuss mailing list