[MD] Why are things called patterns?

[Tuukka Virtaperko]

Andre,
this is actually a damn good analysis.

-Tuukka



23.3.2012 22:48, Andre kirjoitti:
> dmb to Marsha:
> She is so lacking in self-awareness that she doesn't see her own 
> defensive anger as a rather transparent confession, but that's exactly 
> what it is.
>
> Andre:
> Excellent post dmb. I just thought I'd pick some issues out of it to 
> elaborate on it by providing, perhaps a slightly different perspective 
> but, in my view totally commensurate with the MOQ.
>
> Lila is not, strictly speaking, 'lacking in self-awareness' but rather 
> her awareness of herself is defined in biological terms. What does 
> this mean? The biological level has 'emerged' from the inorganic 
> level. At this level there is, as yet, no idea of a social let alone 
> intellectual level. One's awareness, one's consciousness therefore is 
> restricted to the biological level. Everything and everybody is seen 
> in biological terms with biological connotations/intentions/wishes etc.
>
> To put it in intellectual terms: the ego is still at the level of 
> 'body-ego', more or less differentiated from the environment. Lila's 
> anger, of course, and her own 'rationalizations'(and justifications) 
> about her own 'state' are indications of her (pathological) attempt to 
> 'transcend' to the social level(at least). Her paranoia is the 
> protection/indication and result of the failure of this attempt.
>
> Then follows the quote after which you say:
>
> "Marsha read this and finds great wisdom in Lila's words, as if her 
> denial of self were an indication of enlightenment."
>
> Which, as you rightly point out it is not. Rather it is regression. 
> Lila cannot handle social membership, and because the intellectual is 
> never in view Lila doesn't know it and Marsha thinks she has gone 
> beyond it but the 'wisdom' found is only body-centric, 
> naturistic/narcissistic. It is pre-verbal, pre-personal, pre-mental. 
> Lila is "nobody", she is "not at home". She is a (n)ever-changing set 
> of static biological patterns of quality. Socially low, 
> intellectual-nowhere...and in desperate need of stability.
>
> Of course Phaedrus wants to kill her. "Not the biological Lila, but 
> the static patterns that were really going to kill her if she didn't 
> let go". I think what Phaedrus means is that he wants to kill her ( 
> sole) identification of herself with the biological level. To 'escape' 
> into Dynamic Quality i.e. die to this level, die to the sole 
> identification of the self with biology and transcend into the social 
> level (at least...one cannot skip levels as Aurobindo and many others 
> point out), assuming thereby an expanded (self) consciousness. It does 
> mean a 'birth' in the new and a death of (but including) the former.
>
> I do hope this makes a little bit of sense. It sure has help me to 
> understand Marsha's defenses a bit better....not that that is an excuse!
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 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
>