[MD] Sympathy for the Devil

[MarshaV]

Hi Ant,

Be assured I will make an effort not to reference any of the Buddhist commentary from your Textbook or PhD dissertation again.  It's a shame though, I thought you and RMP offered some interesting insight.  


Marsha







On Feb 6, 2013, at 9:47 AM, Ant McWatt wrote:

> 
> Marsha,
> 
> Above all, it's clarity of thought that I'm after here so you'll need to put that quote from David Buchanan in context.  (Though, as it stands, it still sounds to me like the static perspective of the everyday world as provided in LILA).
> 
> As with Keef (now you should see the type of tea he has - it has a kick to it, let's say) who shares my sympathy towards Anglo-American philosophers and philosophologists (the devils who need to be thrown out of these ivory towers), I have sympathy both with the Dynamic viewpoint you tend to take in the conversations here and the static viewpoint that David takes.  I have to have sympathy with both of you as you're both excellent hosts!  ;-)
> 
> Seriously, as you implied in your last response to me in the "self" thread yesterday, both perspectives are useful in the right context.  I just have a feeling (feeling? is that the best term to use here; probably not) that the static viewpoint is the default one in LILA and so should be the default one here.  It's MOQ Discuss; not Mystic Discuss.  If you want to use the Dynamic viewpoint, the Tetralemma (Paul Turner's adopted "baby") or whatever esoteric perpective that Scott Roberts was going on about years ago (if I sound too dismissive of the latter - I shouldn't be because it IS worth at least being aware of these various perspectives), these viewpoints should be qualified before use.  It help keeps that little intellect of mine clear about what's going on; which metaphorical trees are where and in which metaphysical or mystical forest.  
> 
> To use another metaphor, see it as set of three or four paintings that are about the same subject (like that absolutely lovely painting you gave me of Bob derived from that photo of him as a three year old) but painted in three or four different styles; e.g. think of how Van Gogh, Picasso, Joseph Turner and Monet would have each made of that same photograph (when they were on top of their game).  MOQ Discuss is a gallery devoted to one style, it just helps visitors see what is going on if "special exhibitions" are clearly marked as such. 
> 
> Anyway, that's enough preaching.  As an apology for using his name in vain here (which, of course is a public forum), I'll send Keef some of that Golden Monkey tea you like though he'll probably end up smoking it...
> 
> Best wishes,
> 
> Anthony
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> From: valkyr at att.net
>> Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2013 05:00:19 -0500
>> To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
>> Subject: Re: [MD] Sympathy for the Devil
>> 
>> 
>> Hi Ant,
>> 
>> On Feb 5, 2013, at 4:23 PM, Ant McWatt <antmcwatt at hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>> 
>>> So, what I'm trying to do here (rather badly it seems) is to clarify these two perspectives.   From what I was reading in this thread - and 
>>> elsewhere - David Buchanan takes the conventional static perspective of the MOQ (as laid out in LILA) while Marsha tends to take a Dynamic 
>>> "World of Buddhas" perspective.  As I said above, by not qualifying the latter perspective, it confuses things and results in people 
>>> talking over each other; sometimes even being a little rude and frustrated.
>> 
>> Hmmmm.   
>> 
>> "I conclude by making a case that James and Pirsig are offering an empirically based form of philosophical mysticism that is comparable to a non-theistic religion like Buddhism." 
>>       (dmb)
>> 
>> 
>> Really?  
>> 
>> 
>> 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


 
___