[MD] Keep on Duckin'

[Dan Glover]

Hello everyone

On Sat, May 14, 2011 at 3:57 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>
>>> Marsha:
>>> The MoQ has been reified when it is held within a strict framework.
>>
>> Dan:
>> The Metaphysics of Quality is a metaphysics. As such, it has
>> parameters that serve as a framework through which we can order
>> experience. It isn't set in concrete; it is written in pencil rather
>> than pen. In fact, to reify a concept seems to go against the grain of
>> the MOQ. Not sure what you're getting at by using that word...
>
> Marsha:
> To reify does go against the grain of the MoQ, but it represents an
> insidious and common mental habit that leads to attachment and to
> suffering.  Part of the process of reification, as I understand it, is to
> remove the object or concept from its broader context.  It's often done
> to simplify a concept, to make it more understandable, manageable and
> memorable.  The problem comes when the context is forgotten and
> the definition becomes solidified and more "real" than the experience.

Dan:

I still fail to see how this applies to the MOQ, unless a person
begins making statements like: the MOQ is reality. It is not. The MOQ
is a way of ordering reality. It isn't really "out there" in the sense
some contributors both in the past and present seem to think.

Marsha:
> Should patterns be seen as promoting "agency" when millions of people
> are suffering from patterns of bondage?

Dan:

I have no idea what you mean by promoting "agency."

Marsha:

And if you're at all interested
> in Buddhism, you know that attachment and suffering can occur through
> bondage to good patterns too.

Dan:
Well, yes. That is exactly what I said earlier. You replied simply
"okay." So I take it you agreed. A person must obtain a certain level
of virtue and detachment before they begin meddling in other people's
affairs in the name of compassion.

Marsha:
So I am suggesting that we remember a
> good word like 'constraint' may need to be erased to represent a broader
> context. Patterns may represent a 'greater structure to bring a greater
> agency,' but they can also represent a prison.  Patterns may be like a
> kind of freedom, or tolerable restraint, or a harmful, intolerable ignorance.

Dan:

Static patterns of quality determine our lives and constrain, or
limit, our actions. We follow them because we have to. But that
doesn't equate to patterns being a prison.

Thank you,

Dan