[MD] belief

[MarshaV]

Ron,

It's 'to ignore' is to be controlled.  I do not exist in an _either/or_ world.  It is not either static quality OR Dynamic Quality; not for me.  It is too often suggested that I am making such an extreme choice, but I am NOT!   

I'll be away until Wednesday.  Be well.


Marsha



On Nov 4, 2012, at 1:10 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:

> 
> Ron,
> 
> Ignored?  Of course you are correct!
> 
> "To the extent that one's behavior is controlled by static patterns of quality it is without choice. But to the extent that one follows Dynamic Quality, which is undefinable, one's behavior is free."
>      (LILA, Chapter 12)
> 
> 
> Marsha 
> 
> 
> On Nov 3, 2012, at 11:45 AM, X Acto <xacto at rocketmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Marsha,
>> Some opinions are better than others.
>> 
>> an insight best not ignored.
>> 
>> 
>> ________________________________
>> From: MarshaV <valkyr at att.net>
>> To: "moq_discuss at moqtalk.org" <moq_discuss at moqtalk.org> 
>> Sent: Friday, November 2, 2012 11:21 AM
>> Subject: Re: [MD] belief
>> 
>> 
>> X Acto,
>> 
>> Show me your official MoQ decoder ring.  Don't have one?  Well, then we have you, your experience and your opinion.  Not very insightful.  And who cares what some feckless bulldog barks, when RMP states he doesn't even like dogs?  Not me.
>> 
>> 
>> Marsha
>> 
>> 
>> On Nov 2, 2012, at 10:50 AM, X Acto <xacto at rocketmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Marsha said:
>>> 
>>> dmb
>>> 
>>> It's not how you understand or validate what I think, but it's whether you understand what RMP writes:
>>> 
>>> " ... Strictly speaking, the creation of any metaphysics is an immoral act since it's a lower form of evolution, intellect, trying to devour a higher mystic one. The same thing that's wrong with philosophology when it tries to control and devour philosophy is wrong with metaphysics when it tries to devour the world intellectually. It attempts to capture the Dynamic within a static pattern. But it never does. You never get it right. 
>>> So why try? It's like trying to construct a perfect unassailable chess game. No matter how smart you are you're never going to play a game that is 'right' for all people at all times, everywhere. Answers to ten questions led to a hundred more and answers to those led to a thousand more. Not only would he never get it right; the longer he worked on it the wronger it would probably get. . . . ".  (LILA)
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Ron:
>>> Thats the point, you don't really understand what RMP writes. Especially if you consider that quote
>>> as a validation to your assertions. One can't use a quote from a narrative story as though it were to be
>>> taken as a true-ism, applicable as a clear statement concerning any context. The story evolves along 
>>> with the characters thus what is stated also evolves to a conclusion. It's like sniping out one line of
>>> a recipe to use to bake a pie. 
>>> 
>>> What your 2 cups of diced apples says above is that to strive to "get it right" is useless, a chasing
>>> of rainbows. So why try? RMP asks. I think you'll find his answer runs contrary to your assertion.
>>> 
>>> ..
>> 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