[MD] The reification issue completely misunderstood

[118]

Hi Joe,
The dynamic does not manifest, it IS.

Words are useless in terms of the dynamic as you have correctly pointed out.

If you take away words and the sense of other, you are left with DQ.  This is where we live most of the time.  It is only in a societal function that we live in sq.

Mark

On Jun 8, 2011, at 2:09 PM, Joseph  Maurer <jhmau at comcast.net> wrote:

> 
> 
> 
> On 6/7/11 3:15 PM, "118" <ununoctiums at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Hi Joe,
>> I am not sure what words are manifestation of.  Perhaps you mean the static.
>> As it turns out, words help create the static.
>> 
>> Before we learn words, we live in dynamic quality.  Another creator of the
>> static is our comparison to others.  This creates the static self.  This is a
>> "manifestation" of the societal level.  This is created by the sense of
>> "other", which happens at different ages.  The "terrible twos" is a
>> representation of such awareness.
>> 
>> Mark
>> 
> 
> Hi Mark and All,
> 
> I agree words create the static as well as sounds and gestures.  Can the
> dynamic manifest before words?  Yes!  Sounds and gestures also point to the
> dynamic as well as words. Communication is possible in a DQ/SQ metaphysical
> description of reality in many ways.
> 
> How do you know that before we learn words we live in a DQ/SQ environment
> since dynamic quality is indefinable?  We experience dynamic quality through
> (? Etc,) sounds and gestures as well as words.
> 
> Joe
> 
> 
>> On Jun 5, 2011, at 8:09 PM, Joseph  Maurer <jhmau at comcast.net> wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 6/5/11 3:49 PM, "118" <ununoctiums at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Hi Joe,
>>>> Quite the contrary, it is words that are soporific.  Words entrap one into
>>>> the
>>>> static.
>>>> 
>>>> Mark
>>>> 
>>> Hi Mark,
>>> 
>>> Words are a manifestation.  You have to be already trapped to manifest in a
>>> soporific mode.
>>> 
>>> Joe
>>> 
>>>> On Jun 5, 2011, at 12:09 PM, Joseph  Maurer <jhmau at comcast.net> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On 6/5/11 7:26 AM, "118" <ununoctiums at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Hi Marsha,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 9:56 PM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Jun 3, 2011, at 3:33 PM, 118 wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Hi Marsha,
>>>>>>>> Yes, and Buddha claimed to be a common man, first.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> My question to you is: Taking out who you list below, who is left?
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Mark
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Hi Mark,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> An answer:  There is some experience of being awake.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Marsha
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> [Mark]
>>>>>> Yes, Buddha was certainly "awake".  He help many others wake up during
>>>>>> his lifetime.  I think that much of this is relegating static quality
>>>>>> to the social level of words.
>>>>>> Mark
>>>>> 
>>>>> Hi Mark,
>>>>> 
>>>>> I guess deaf mutes are forbidden the social level, and cannot be awake!
>>>>> 
>>>>> Joe
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Jun 3, 2011, at 10:18 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On Jun 3, 2011, at 12:46 PM, david buchanan wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> And yet Marsha says she hates reification and loves Bo.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Marsha:
>>>>>>>>> I neither hate reification, nor love Bo, as you state it.   I already
>>>>>>>>> stated:  Reification represents how the common man and many scientists,
>>>>>>>>> academics and even philosophers think.  It evolved as tool to
>>>>>>>>> facilitate
>>>>>>>>> some kind of betterness.  But it is flawed and of course the MoQ can
>>>>>>>>> help
>>>>>>>>> rectify the flaw.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Well, actually, I love all, even you, can you believe it...
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> ___
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> ___
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 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
> 
> 
> 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