[MD] The Relativist's journey

[118]

Heh, heh,
Doing what you call the "dmb dance"?  Now Marsha, if you are only going to answer the questions that keep you hidden then what can I say?   I suppose ignorance is bliss.  Every time I pull your covers you scurry back under.

Now, I know you need the last word, so what is it this time?  How about neti-neti?  Certainly if you don't care what it is, it can be neither.  This is a wonderful interaction, thank you for the opportunity, I mean it, it is good practice for the both of us.

A relative cheers to you,
Mark

On Nov 23, 2011, at 12:42 PM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:

> 
> 
> Guess so.   
> 
> 
> 
> On Nov 23, 2011, at 3:41 PM, 118 wrote:
> 
>> Hi Marsha,
>> Perhaps I have stumped you with my request for a definition in the
>> post below.  Perhaps you think it is a trap, and are doing the same
>> thing that you project on dmb, hiding under the covers.  Perhaps this
>> question did not get your attention.
>> 
>> So, let me ask you a different question:
>> What is it deep down inside you (and possibly many others) that causes
>> you to want to compare everything?
>> 
>> No, not a trick question, a question requesting understanding on my
>> part.  Relativism is only one way of looking at things, imo.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Mark
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 3:50 PM, 118 <ununoctiums at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hi Marsha, how do you define "relative" as used in you comments below?
>>> 
>>> Mark
>>> 
>>> On Nov 22, 2011, at 11:05 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Nov 22, 2011, at 12:33 PM, Steven Peterson wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Hi Marsha,
>>>>> 
>>>>> You have raised a lot of good points here. It seems that dmb's
>>>>> argument is with Ant McWatt as much as it is with you though for some
>>>>> reason he hasn't acknowledged that fact. dmb will, as always, have a
>>>>> tough time articulating what particular sort of relativism--some
>>>>> dangerous sort?--that applies to you but not equally well to James and
>>>>> Pirsig.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Best,
>>>>> Steve
>>>> 
>>>> Hi Steve,
>>>> 
>>>> It's not Ant's quote about truth within the MoQ alone.  It's RMP discussing multiple truths.  It's also the correlation made between Buddhism's conventional reality and static quality.  Conventional reality is most always described as the relative, practical everyday truth.  I doubt if dmb makes any sense, even to himself, if he doesn't conflate and confuse epistemological relativism and cultural relativism.  And his presenting an unsourced definition that begs the question?  Wow!
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Marsha
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> ___
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 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