[MD] [Bulk] Re: the story of "me"

[MarshaV]

Actually, 'escape' is a form of attachment, attachment due to fear.  




On Apr 22, 2011, at 3:30 AM, MarshaV wrote:

> 
> Ron, 
> 
> I have no desire to make this into discussion on the meaning - denotation, connotation or interpretation - of words, but when you translated the word I used 'unattached' for the more emotionally charged word 'escape,' the meaning of my statement changed.  I have no desire to defend the idea of 'escaping value.'  
> 
> What was your rationale for making such a switch.  
> 
> 
> Marsha 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Apr 21, 2011, at 7:34 PM, X Acto wrote:
> 
>> Marsha,
>> what exactly are my assumptions?
>> 
>> That you are a rational human being that has reasons for their beliefs?
>> 
>> I suppose you are correct Marsha.
>> 
>> -Ron
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ----- Original Message ----
>> From: MarshaV <valkyr at att.net>
>> To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
>> Sent: Thu, April 21, 2011 3:55:08 PM
>> Subject: Re: [MD] [Bulk] Re: the story of "me"
>> 
>> 
>> Ron, 
>> 
>> It's a philosophical question from your heart and head.  I have a different 
>> philosophical perspective, a different heart and head.  You're looking for 
>> affirmation from and for your point-of-view, your personal interpretation.  
>> I suppose since you composed and asked the question, you need to 
>> answer it for yourself.  Your question's assumptions make no sense to me. 
>> 
>> 
>> Marsha  
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Apr 21, 2011, at 2:22 PM, X Acto wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Ron,
>>> 
>>> I reject your analysis.  But thanks for the projection; it's always 
>>> interesting.  
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Marsha  
>>> 
>>> Marsha,
>>> Then you are rejecting a philosophical question not a subjective analysis.
>>> 
>>> The Question: 
>>>> 
>>>> if we are composed of value, doesent it make more
>>>> sense to develop those value than to try to escape them?
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Apr 20, 2011, at 8:53 AM, X Acto wrote:
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Hello Ron,
>>>> 
>>>> Having stated that the "Cartesian 'Me" is an illusion, and the definition of 
>>>> self is a flow of ever-changing, interdependent, impermanent inorganic, 
>>>> biological, social and intellectual static patterns of value, I would have to 
>> 
>>>> say NO, I do not stand for any-thing.  If you recognize "me" standing for 
>>>> something, I would suspect you are recognizing social  and intellectual 
>>>> patterns 
>>>> 
>>>> we both share: patterns that attract and patterns that repel.  If you want me 
>> 
>>>> to 
>>>> 
>>>> admit an "intention," it would be to become "unattached" to these patterns.  
>>>> That doesn't mean destroy them, it means to become unattached.  If this all 
>>>> sounds too lofty to be "real," I'll confess that the "Cartesian Me" pattern has 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> me in it's grip far, far FAR too often. I am "human, all too human."  
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Marsha  
>>>> 
>>>> Marsha,
>>>> Why  fight being human, refine it dont deny it. if we are composed of value, 
>>>> doesent it make more
>>>> sense to develop those value than to try to escape them?
>>>> 
>>>> -Ron
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Apr 18, 2011, at 11:14 PM, X Acto wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> well, maybe perhaps one day you'll actually stand for something.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I think you already do
>>>>> 
>>>>> but you have yet to admit it.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> ----- Original Message ----
>>>>> From: MarshaV <valkyr at att.net>
>>>>> To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
>>>>> Sent: Mon, April 18, 2011 4:58:28 AM
>>>>> Subject: Re: [MD] [Bulk] Re: the story of "me"
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Interesting Ron,  
>>>>> 
>>>>> I had lunch with a friend early last week, and as we were talking, 
>>>>> I was realizing that my words were not really True.  We were discussing 
>>>>> experiences in other countries.  And it made me uncomfortable to give 
>>>>> any opinion at all.  What I spoke of my experiences in Italy, would be 
>>>>> different if I explained them to someone else, or explained them on 
>>>>> different day.  They'd have been different if I were talking at a different 
>>>>> hour.  These Italian utterances were so transitory.  The talk was harmless 
>>>>> enough, so I chalked it up to being social.  But it made me squirm none 
>>>>> the less because it represents all semantic expression.  
>>>>> 
>>>>> Maybe this will help you see why bottom line is always "not this, not that."    
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Marsha  
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Apr 17, 2011, at 11:43 PM, X Acto wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Hi Ron,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Are you suggesting that we add 'stories' as another synonym too, and I forgot 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>> Good.  
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Really, are you suggesting that these are additional synonyms?  Or something 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>>>> else.
>>>>>> I'd like to know how you're thinking about this.  
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Marsha  
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Marsha,
>>>>>> I'm going after general meanings of the terms we use, I think :
>>>>>> Good
>>>>>> Choice
>>>>>> preference
>>>>>> selection
>>>>>> Value
>>>>>> And yes freedom
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> All have meaning very similar to the word Quality
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I think our stories our biographies tell more about our values
>>>>>> than any concept of a cartesian self.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I venture to suppose that our stories are our static values.
>>>>>> And I believe we do have a choice in following them or not.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Apr 17, 2011, at 9:38 AM, MarshaV wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> But it sounds like you are saying you are assigning 'choice' and 'freedom' as 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>>> additional synonyms for Quality.  So synonyms for Quality are Value, 
>>>>>>> Experience,
>>>>>>> Morality, Choice, and Freedom.  Are there more?  Is that what you are saying, 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>>> that 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> choice and freedom are additional synonyms?  Or are those synonyms for static 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>>> quality alone?  
>>>>