[MD] Indeterminism

[MarshaV]

Hi Ham,   
 
 
On Oct 12, 2011, at 2:49 AM, Ham Priday wrote:

> Ham:
> I think you may have misunderstood my epistemology, Mark.  Essence is the Creator, but "all creation" is not what it appears to be.  (I know that what I'm about to say will sound like Marsha's argument for the Buddhist 'no-self', but bear with me.) 


Marsha:
It's a little unfair to label it 'Marsha's argument for the Buddhist 'no-self', given the following excerpts from the MoQ:


 
 
Annotation 29: “The MOQ, as I understand it, denies any existence of a “self” that is independent of inorganic, biological, social or intellectual patterns. There is no “self” that contains these patterns. These patterns contain the self. This denial agrees with both religious mysticism and scientific knowledge. In Zen, there is reference to “big self” and “small self.” Small self is the patterns. Big self is Dynamic Quality."
 
      (RMP, Lila’s Child)
 
 
 
The MOQ, like the Buddhists and the Determinists (odd bedfellows) says this “autonomous individual” is an illusion.  
 
      (RMP, Copleston)
 
 
 
"This Cartesian 'Me,' this autonomous little homunculus who sits behind our eyeballs looking out through them in order to pass judgment on the affairs of the world, is just completely ridiculous. This self-appointed little editor of reality is just an impossible fiction that collapses the moment one examines it. This Cartesian 'Me' is a software reality, not a hardware reality. This body on the left and this body on the right are running variations of the same program, the same 'Me,' which doesn't belong to either of them. The 'Me's' are simply a program format.
 
Talk about aliens from another planet. This program based on 'Me's' and 'We's' is the alien. 'We' has only been here for a few thousand years or so. But these bodies that 'We' has taken over were around for ten times that long before 'We' came along. And the cells - my God, the cells have been around for thousands of times that long."
 
    (LILA, Chapter 15)  
 
 
 
5.6  THE NOTION OF THE SELF
 
"An example of _sammuti-sacca_ is the concept of self.  Pirsig follows the Buddha's teachings about the 'self' which doesn't recognise that it has any real existence and that only 'nothingness' (i.e. Dynamic Quality) is thought to be real."
 
(McWatt, Anthony, 'AN INTRODUCTION TO ROBERT PIRSIG’S METAPHYSICS OF QUALITY')
  
 
 
Annotattion 77:  "It's important to remember that both science and Eastern religions regard "the individual" as an empty concept. It is literally a figure of speech. If you start assigning concrete reality to it, you will find yourself in a philosophic quandary".
 
  (RMP, Lila’s Child)
 
 
 
“There isn't any 'man' independent of the patterns. Man is the patterns.
“This fictitious 'man' has many synonyms; 'mankind,' 'people,' 'the public,' and even such pronouns as 'I,' 'he,' and 'they.' Our language is so organized around them and they are so convenient to use it is impossible to get rid of them. There is really no need to. Like 'substance' they can be used as long as it is remembered that they're terms for collections of patterns and not some independent primary reality of their own.
 
    (LILA, Chapter 12)




Marsha 
     
 
___