[MD] X = no-self

[Dan Glover]

Hello everyone

On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 10:01 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>
> On Jan 4, 2011, at 10:50 AM, Dan Glover wrote:
>
>> Hello everyone
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 8:50 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> What do you think the 'self' is within the MoQ?  You might check your copy of the MoQ Textbook.
>>
>> Hi Marsha
>>
>> What is self?
>
> Marsha:
> That would depend on who you asked?  A philosopher, a psychologist, a theologian,
> a Native-American, a lawyer, a child might all have different answers.

Dan:
I am asking you... who are you?

>
>
>> I'm curious.
>>
>> Why do I need a textbook to tell me what I've known my whole life?
>
> Marsha:
> Obviously you don't, but there is a section that addresses the 'self.'
>

Dan:
Well, I don't know that it is all that obvious, but again, I am
curious. The self is all we are, all that is, all that ever will be.
If we don't know what it is, then what do we know?

>
>> Why do I need a metaphysics?
>
> Marsha:
> Why did you edit Lila's Child?   Why should anyone read it?
>

Dan:
I did it on account of being asked to do so. As to why anyone should
read it... that is quite a good question. I suppose if someone wanted
to further their knowledge concerning the MOQ, LILA'S CHILD might
help, since Robert Pirsig answers some contributors' questions. On the
other hand, another person would have perhaps chosen different posts
to edit and perhaps would have been more adept at asking and getting
permission to use certain posts that were denied.

It has been nearly ten years now since LC was published. I have always
planned on going back and re-editing the book but as the years go by I
realize what a monumental task that would be. I don't know as I am up
to it, or not. I think not. Instead, I am intrigued with e-publishing
and how easy it is these days to publish a book for downloading on
Kindle and other e-readers. I notice of late that I sell more e-copies
of LILA'S CHILD than I do traditional books. As a writer, I find that
very interesting and full of possibilities that didn't exist ten years
ago.

>
>> Isn't self already clear to you too? Why so much effort spent endlessly defining
>> that which we already know?
>
> Marsha:
> These seem to be your questions and don't make sense to me.

Dan:
Well, like I said, I am curious, and perhaps I've worded my questions
wrongly. I apologize if they don't make sense to you.

>
>
>>
>> Dan
>>
>> PS An asshole is the twin of an angel.
>
>
> Marsha:
> Is this absolutely true?  How do you know?

Dan:
I know on account of my self being both asshole and angel at the same
time. As for truth, experience suggests there are no absolutes and I
know that statement can be construed as an absolute so don't bother.