[MD] logically incoherent

[MarshaV]

Hi Ron,

Marsha understands perfectly well that the context out of which YOU, Ron, speak is your own "personal crusade."  Don't be so foolish!  If you'd like me to consider your point-of-view, offer it.  I usually find your posts quite interesting, but your ideas may, or may not, be where my interest lie at the moment.  Besides, you really have no idea what I understand, or do not understand.  As you've already suggested in your other post, I adhere to a certain humility to what I can know: neti, neti.  'Not this, not that' is always first and foremost directed at myself.   

Marsha 




On Sep 7, 2011, at 8:09 PM, X Acto wrote:

> 
> 
> Ham said:
> In closing, I'd like to stress one additional point that applies to a number of MD participants who seem to be treating reality as a myth, which is nihilism carried to an extreme.  For example, Ron recently aserted:
> 
>> Experience is illusion. Therefore all wisdom is illusional.
>> Quality is illusion, every last bit.
> 
> Such pronouncements are not only troubling, they make a mockery of Pirsig's thesis.  You may call existence an illusion, just as you call the self an illusion.  But you can not escape the fact that this "illusion" is your reality.
> 
> Ron:
> Excellent Ham, exactly what I was hoping to draw out of the comment. Unfortunately Marsha seems
> to have missed this point. It forces us to really examine what we mean by the terms "illusion" and "reality"
> I was hoping this would prompt Marsha to do the same, but it seems she is so caught up in her own
> personal crusade that she really loses out on an important discussion about establishing a contextual
> meaning of those terms.
> It is one thing to smugly thumb ones nose at certain kinds of ideas as illusional but one must also understand
> that all concepts and perceptions are illusional, they are limits imposed on the limitless begging the questions
> "what makes some illusions better than others"? "is this what we mean when we say something is "real"?
> Because the term "reality" alludes to an undistorted perception, which of course, does not exist. Conceptually
> then, an undistorted reality can not be percieved, understood, nor experienced, because to percieve to
> understand and to experience is to limit thus distort the "real" situation.
>  
> ..



 
___