[MD] aggregates of grasping

[118]

Hi Marsha,
You seem to be using your patterns as objects.  Am I wrong here?  I do
not see how you are making the patterns something different.  Even
objects can change, so that does not mean anything different.  It
would seem that your are simply performing a word change from
"objects" to "patterns".  How are they different?  We see a pattern on
a rug, because it repeats itself.  That is what a pattern is.  What is
it about your patterns that provides such repetition.  How is it that
you undergo pattern recognition?

Just seeking clarification for my own understanding.

Mark

On 3/6/12, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>
>
> On Mar 6, 2012, at 3:35 AM, "Ham Priday" <hampday1 at verizon.net> wrote:
>
>> I find it interesting that our beloved Marsha, who has consistently denied
>> her selfness, now denies her ability to form opinions, as well.  After
>> reviewing Mark's analysis of her March 4 dissertation on feelings and
>> their ownership, Marsha responded:
>>
>>> I don't know enough to form an opinion.  It is extremely interesting,
>>> though,
>>> and I hope to learn more.
>>
>> One can only wonder what all those quotes posted from the Vedanta and
>> Buddhist scholars are intended to express if not her opinion.  Marsha has
>> certainly formulated her own opinion of what a SOM pattern is, since
>> "ever-changing, conditionally co-dependent and impermanent, static
>> patterns of inorganic, biological, social and intellectual value" has
>> become the mantra that identifies her.
>
> Hello Ham,
>
> You must have been reading my thoughts, for I have surely been thinking
> about you, and hoping you would find a way to do what you do so well.
>
> I would like to comment on the term "SOM pattern".  For the expression seems
> both true and false.  The mind does seem to have evolved to reify ALL useful
> experience into objects of conception & perception; it is a very insidious
> tendency.  I do believe my definition of static patterns helps to move one's
> ideas about "objects" from discrete, bounded, objective entities to ones of
> pragmatically formed, recursive, interdependent "patterns of value
> (processes)".
>
> And, yes, I have found much useful detail presented by Vedanta and Buddhist
> scholars.  It often surprises me how clearly they present very difficult and
> strange (to the Western way of thinking) ideas. But always I believe one
> should continually check and verify.
>
>
> 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
>