[MD] It's all an analogy. Does this change anything?

[MarshaV]

Hi David,


On Aug 5, 2012, at 7:46 AM, David Harding <davidjharding at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Marsha,
> 
>>>>> Marsha wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> "I will say only that I meant that it is ALL 'analogy all the way down' and out, if you like.  Yes, it is probably an overused aphorism, but I still think it has value."  
>>>>> 
>>>>> Taking into consideration that everything is an analogy - do you think after accepting this, one should change anything about how they see the world?
>>>> 
>>>> Doesn't lol stand for 'lots of laughter'?  Lol.  Everything did change, but then "everything" is change, so to speak.
>>> 
>>> Color me confused.  Do you want me to be confused?
>> 
>> I answered your question.  If I didn't interpret your question properly sarcasm won't make it any clearer.  And what do you mean by 'should'?   That might be a better question?  Who should?   Little ole conventional me?  Do we need to delve onto the topic of anatta once again?  
> 
> Okay, my apologies.  I will be more precise and, rather than direct my questions toward any sort of normative conclusions you may or may not have derived from your experience, I will keep them directed towards your personal experience only..

In understanding that "everything" is analogy, everything changes.  All static patterns of value became transparent, some more than others, some disappear altogether.  


>>>>> What of things like reason and logic?
>>>> 
>>>> What of them?  
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> Should these change in light of the fact that everything is an analogy all the way down?
>>>> 
>>>> My understanding of logic and reason had already changed after taking a class in formal logic. But generally, I still open the milk container before pouring milk into my coffee, I open the door before walking outside, and I still use cash, check or credit card when making a purchase.   
>>> 
>>> What is your understanding of reason and logic?  Are they important? 
>> 
>> You originally presented the question, so you provide the definitions specific to your inquiry, otherwise check the dictionary.  What do YOU mean by reason and logic?  And conventionally important compared to what?   If you are attempting to present a point of your own, just present it clearly and I'll consider it.
> 
> I'm not attempting to present anything here..  Just asking you philosophical questions..  This is a philosophical forum no?  Can we not ask one another questions on our philosophical views? 

Yes, and I did request your definition of reason and logic, but I do not see your philosophic answer courageously appearing in this post.   


> So - back to my original line of enquiry - you mentioned that you attended a class in formal logic - how did your opinion of logic and reason change after that class? I.e. - what were your original views and what are they now?

Before the class, I thought reason and logic determined absolutes.  After the class, I saw formal reason and logic more as a Holy Sieve.  -   I spent six months after that class intently eavesdropping on discussions, conversations and lectures, and found no one setting up syllogisms, or anything close.  That would include university professors, by the way.  I received my undergraduate degree from UCONN; it has a respectable reputation.  -  Today, I appreciate doubt; I attend to illusions, bubbles, shadows, dew drops and the lightning flash; I am overjoyed with not this, not that; and love, yes love, the idea that the world is nothing but value.  But this does not mean I reject intellectual patterns; I like the idea of examining "intellectual realities the same way one examines paintings in an art gallery, not with an effort to find out which one is the 'real' painting, but simply to enjoy and keep those that are of value. There are many sets of intellectual reality in existence and we can perceive some to have more quality than others, but that we do so is, in part, the result of our history and current patterns of values." (RMP, LILA, Chapter 8)


> Thanks,
> 
> -David.

Thanks,

Marsha