[MD] [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] Re: Knots

Wed Oct 27 10:08:23 PDT 2010

No, no answers, just ideas.  I use you guys to help me out.  Your posts are
like gold.

Mark

On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 8:37 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:

>
>
> It seems like you have all the answers already.  Okay.
>
>
>
>
> On Oct 27, 2010, at 10:42 AM, 118 wrote:
>
> > Hi Marsha,
> >
> > You will find me full of surprises, I have to walk on a razor's edge
> > sometimes.  You have noted that physics (Wallace) is providing some
> support
> > for Eastern thought through analogies in physics.  Physics is an
> excellent
> > tool because of its high standing in our current society.  It is a matter
> of
> > convincing, and all descriptions are analogies which subscribe to common
> > sense.  You are correct in the assumptions of truth being held by many
> > scientific realists.  There are many philosophers that point out its
> > shortcomings.  But, if the intention is to return back to a more
> subjective
> > appreciation, any tool will do.  I am not waiting, I am just watching.  I
> > have not control over any crowd behavior, I don't think you do either.
>  But
> > what do I know, you may be stirring your cauldron right now (smiley
> face).
> >
> > I believe we experience DQ through every moment of each day.  The
> reflective
> > consciousness as discussed in Vedic thought is something that I take to
> mean
> > that mirror of the world that is created in a highly structured way by
> our
> > brains in order to interact in as simple a way as needed.  Reflection may
> be
> > considered one step removed (however it can also be classified as DQ
> since
> > it happens in real time, in the present), buy how often are we
> reflecting?
> > Out of the thousand of things that we experience every minute, only a few
> > of those are contemplated.  No effort is needed to obtain first hand DQ,
> all
> > it takes is some discipline in mindfulness to recognize it.  This is the
> Zen
> > way.  We have discussed this before, and indeed it is discussed in ZMM
> when
> > attention is payed to motorcycle maintenance.  If we are expecting
> something
> > more, then there are always drugs...Once they legalize Mary Jane here in
> CA
> > there may be lots of DQ, right before the car crash.
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 12:49 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> 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
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ___
> >>
> >>
> >> 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
>