[MD] expanded rationality

MarshaV valkyr at att.net
Thu Jul 12 11:46:39 PDT 2012 

Hi,

It's more like a chute down: dreams, illusions, bubbles, shadows, dew drops, lightening flash, wheeeeee... not this, not that...  The steps to get back up are all but a ghost of an experience. You asked for the foundation and I gave it to you:  the fundamental nature of static quality (the determinant) is Dynamic Quality (the indeterminate); now please do not complain when I answer. I do not always need to reject static value, because the insight is always near, or at least it seems so.  That's letting go.  Not always, of course.  I am not close to being nominated for mystic-hood.  

What additional type of pointing to the MoQ would you have me perform.  My favorite aspect of the MoQ is patterns of value, the ghostly perceptions and conceptions which have such  wondrous existence.  I am also awed by the "code of art" in its rising above the self and contact with the indeterminate.  Ever listen to the overture to Parsifal?  Or Beethoven's Ninth?   Or the Concierto de Aranjuez?  All the arts, of course.  Etc. &etc. &etc...  


Marsha


On Jul 12, 2012, at 1:31 PM, 118 <ununoctiums at gmail.com> wrote:

> 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
> 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

More information about the Moq_Discuss mailing list