[MD] expanded rationality

[118]

Hi Marsha,
Yes, I know that is where you "go down" to, that being "not being able to point."

You may recall that I asked how do you "go up" from that starting point to your current beliefs.  I had suggested you simply reverse the direction of your getting down to "not this, not that".  This should be easy since you have gone one way already.  I just don't know how you get from the "inability to point" to MoQ.  I thought I might learn something.

Sent laboriously from an iPhone,
Mark

On Jul 12, 2012, at 8:31 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:

> 
> Hi Mark,
> 
> Thought I made it clear the other day that the fundamental, for me, goes all the way down to 
> 'not this, not that', or 
> 
>    All conditioned dharmas 
>    Are like dreams, illusions, bubbles, shadows, 
>    Like dew drops and a lightning flash. 
>    Contemplate them thus.
> 
> 
> Marsha 
> 
> 
> 
> On Jul 11, 2012, at 3:53 PM, 118 <ununoctiums at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> OK Marsha,
>> 
>> Here is question 3 of the Socratic dialogue.
>> 
>> Is the fact that you hypothetically accept static or conventional logic real?
>> 
>> I am simply asking where you base your foundation.  This is, of course in line with Arlo's comment on infinite recursion, a paradox that is easily avoided.  Although it is fun to play with since such paradoxes can bring about understanding outside of the paradox.
>> 
>> So, again, what is truly real for you?
>> 
>> Sent laboriously from an iPhone,
>> Mark
>> 
>> On Jul 11, 2012, at 1:31 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> Greetings Mark,
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Jul 11, 2012, at 12:56 AM, 118 <ununoctiums at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> OK,
>>>> If knowledge is not REAL, then what IS real to you?  I am not sure how you are using the word real so I do not understand.  Is anything real?
>>>> 
>>>> Just some more inane questions since I have no clue what you are talking about.  
>>> 
>>> Are you wondering about the adjective 'necessarily' in "necessarily real or true"?  It came with the dictionary citation.  I hypothetically accept static, or conventional, knowledge.  
>>> 
>>> If I suppose a angry bear is chasing me, I suppose I will run?  
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> For example, is knowledge not to run into a conflict in Serbia real for you?
>>> 
>>> I prefer the idea of negotiating conflict resolution in Serbia.  
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Marsha 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> Sent laboriously from an iPhone,
>>>> Mark
>>>> 
>>>> On Jul 10, 2012, at 4:04 PM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Hi Mark,
>>>>> 
>>>>> That universal qualifier (all) means it cannot be proved, and I cannot see how it it can be falsified either.  As a hypothesis it is a loser.  I do think one can still hold all knowledge to be hypothetical; hypothetical as in supposed but not necessarily real or true.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Marsha
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Jul 10, 2012, at 5:27 PM, 118 <ununoctiums at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> If it is a hypothesis, how do you go about proving it?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Yet another inane question from the mind of Mark the scientist.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Sent laboriously from an iPhone,
>>>>>> Mark
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Jul 10, 2012, at 10:00 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Hi Arlo,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> And oh I do like it, but can it be falsified?  I don't think so…   
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Marsha 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Jul 10, 2012, at 12:56 PM, ARLO JAMES BENSINGER JR wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> [Marsha]
>>>>>>>> There it is: "all knowledge is hypothetical". 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> [Arlo]
>>>>>>>> Interesting hypothesis... 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Jul 10, 2012, at 12:49 PM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Greetings,
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> There it is: "all knowledge is hypothetical".  I've been listening to a youtube audio about Karl Popper, his 'Science of Falsification'.   It's a Popper quote.  Not an idea original to me, probably something I read in the book 'Black Swan' which had many good things to say about Popper.  
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 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
>> 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