[MD] [Bulk] Re: Knots

[MarshaV]

Mark, 

You surprise me.  It sounds like you're going to wait for the Great White 
Scientific Hope, wearing a white hat, to ride up on his white horse, Physics, 
to save the day?  As best I can figure out, most physicists are still scientific 
realists and ignore the quantum enigmas.   It's interesting because I always 
thought the drive of the MoQ was to experience first-hand DQ, "pure 
experience" or the Undifferentiated Continuum, not just to talk about it.    


Marsha 



On Oct 26, 2010, at 7:33 PM, 118 wrote:

> Hi Marsha,
> I'll get to that book when I find it in the library, sounds interesting.  If
> one were to divide metaphysics into the contemplation of the subjective and
> contemplation of the objective, I would state that the pendulum has swung
> very far into the objective.  The recent rise of esoteric religions such a
> theosophy and new age dreams are adding weight to bring the pendulum back
> down the other way.  It is indeed dark ages for subjective contemplation,
> and in that sense, man is at a very low point at this period in time.
> Sciences such as physics are breaking through however and it is just a
> matter of time.  The Tao is unchangeable in the end, swinging back and
> forth.
> 
> Mark
> 
> On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 1:20 PM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Hi Mark,
>> 
>> Why wait for some scientific future to come true when there is an
>> immediate need.  There is this twenty-five hundred-year-old
>> tradition that has been working on just such a science of mind.
>> From what little I understand they use both rationality and special
>> introspective techniques.  To remind you:
>> 
>> 
>>   "Upon first learning of mental states described in traditions outside of
>> one's, there is a natural tendency to seek counterparts in one's own
>> background or in the knowledge of one's native culture.  For many people it
>> si difficult to acknowledge the possibility that the attainment of
>> quiescence may have no counterpart in Western civilization, that the
>> contemplative science of ancient India made advances that the West has not
>> duplicated.  Especially over the past five hundred years, the West has made
>> tremendous advances in developing physical instruments to aid us in
>> exploring the world.  Such research instruments have enabled us to probe
>> deeply into the nature of physical phenomena, but they offer no direct
>> access to mental events.  The mind is the only instrument capable of
>> examining all types of natural events --- including both the physical and
>> mental.  But in terms of refining human awareness in the development of
>> stability and clarity as described above, Western civllization has made no
>> progress since the Scientific Revolution.  In this field of contemplative
>> science ours is a backward, underdeveloped culture.  If we wish to explore
>> these Buddhist theories and practices further, we are well advised to
>> proceed not with blink faith, but with our full powers of critical
>> intelligence.  In so doing we follow the advice that the Buddha gave to his
>> monks when he counseled:
>> 
>>    O monks, sages accept my words after examining them well--
>>    like gold after it has been melted, cut and rubbed--but not out
>>    of devotion [for me].
>> 
>> (Wallace, B. Alan, 'Choosing Reality, : A Buddhist View of Physics and the
>> Mind',2003,pp.198-199)
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Oct 26, 2010, at 12:08 PM, 118 wrote:
>> 
>>> There is some discussion on the use of the subject-object analogy in MOQ
>>> discuss, and the attributes of Value to such an analogy.  This bears
>> inquiry
>>> as it could also be interpreted that such an analogy is at the heart of
>> many
>>> religions.  This SO divide brings out the search for the true subjective.
>>> Vedic philosophy can be interpreted to have assigned such subjective the
>>> “I”.  That is the “I” that is witnessing what I appear to be.  In such
>>> philosophy, that subject is compared to a vibration or a hum.  Buddhist
>>> thought which arose from such Eastern tradition, used intelligent thought
>> to
>>> describe the subjective as not inherently existent, and described such a
>>> concept with a co-dependent arising metaphor.  More recently, Christian
>>> metaphors were interpreted by Kierkegaard, who proposed that the ultimate
>>> union of the subjective and objective could be achieved through extreme
>>> belief and devotion, requiring a leap.  Much existentialist
>> interpretation
>>> followed his lead, including Heidegger’s “Being”.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> In terms as what is referred to as Western philosophy, it is the opinion
>> of
>>> this author that the subject-object analogy was converted to an
>>> object-object description.  That is the comparison of two objects.  Plato
>>> provided such description by objectifying the subjective.  More recently,
>>> Descartes further congealed the objectification of subjectivity by
>> defining
>>> it as thought.  The statement “I think, therefore I am” suggests that
>>> thinking is the underlying presence of self.  Previously, in the Eastern
>>> thought described above, thinking was something that the self experienced
>> as
>>> an object.  The description of the objectified sense of thought as the
>>> subjective sense of "I" has more recently led to notions by scientific
>>> materialism that the self can be explained physically through appropriate
>>> investigation into the brain itself.  Such studies are ongoing, but
>>> difficult.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Western considerations of the subject-object confused the subject with
>> the
>>> object.  The metaphorical root of this transition could arise from the
>> use
>>> of language.  As a matter of logistics, language must express the subject
>>> object idea as object-object to be useful.  Subject-object Metaphysics
>>> cannot be discussed without the objectifying of the subjective side.
>>> Indeed, the conversion of thought into words is a process of
>>> objectification.  Is this  notion therefore something that creates a
>>> roadblock and cannot be truly discussed due to the structure of language,
>>> and something that we have no control over?
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Perhaps, but consider the following thought experiment (science fiction
>> as a
>>> metaphor).  At some time in the future, the principle of telepathy will
>> have
>>> been understood and harnessed.  There would be direct communication
>> between
>>> brains through some kind of brain-wave harnessing.  Would such
>> communication
>>> be in the form of words?  The answer is no.  There would be no need for
>>> words since entire awareness could be communicated.  Words would be
>> bypassed
>>> so that entire appreciations could be conveyed such as the sense one gets
>>> when looking at a painting.  This would mean that thoughts as words would
>>> not be necessary, and words would only be used temporarily over long
>>> distances if there were no other means of communication.  Such words
>> would
>>> be considered primitive communication, like the telegraph is now.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> The awareness of how words form our subject-object metaphysics is, in the
>>> opinion of this author, a fruitful interpretation which is provided as
>>> analogy.  Through the development of such metaphors it is possible to
>>> appreciate (or create) some more meaningful underlying principles (or
>>> metaphors).
>>> 
>>> 
>>> The opinions expressed in this post are the author's and do not
>> necessarily
>>> represent positions of the MOQ.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 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
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> 
>> 
>> 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


 
___