Hi Struan,
Well, this is exactly what I expected from you : nothing
understood, everything fitted into little boxes with
pre-arranged names (you calling me fascist is a real laugh,
for one), and all criticism dismissed with a laugh and a
wave of the hand. Nothing gets through, heh ?
I also note that you don't care to answer any of the
critics I've posted (why on earth I wonder, or perhaps I
don't). Very funny too how everytime you enter a field
where you cannot answer, we are the ones who "misunderstand
what we are talking about". The "Atman" is not the self,
and perhaps you should try to understand a bit more what is
meant by that, or Karma and Dharma before calling people
ignorant. You might be academically good on the subject
(I'll give you the benefit of doubt), but I suspect that
you misunderstand everything in relation with mysticism.
Again, I'm not surprised.
As for curing people, spare me your false moral tones,
I'm not impressed. Again to destroy criticism you just
pretend to misunderstand it in a way that makes it
abbhorent : lousy trick but I'm getting used to it. The
definition of a crime is either in a static context to
ignore the static good (laws and taboos), thus degenerating
(socially speaking ) and in a dynamic context to ignore the
dynamic good, not recognizing DQ thus not evolving (like
the priests who condemned the brujo in 'Lila', or the FBI
when persecuting the leaders of the Social Rights
Movement). Finally, is the drive to rehabilitate criminals
more or less moral than to let them rot in a cell for so
many years ? Who's the fascist here ?
The Human Rights, I thought that would be clear without
having to explain it to you, can still be maintained
through the moral hierarchy of the levels. It is
justification enough for them. The false notion of
"Freedom", with all the attached confusion around it is no
longer necessary to validate them.
Struan, do I ALWAYS have to spell it out for you ?
"That's a good dog" clarifies nothing, it's only an
example of a world-view, that strangely you reject anyway
(it's a mystic one). As for linguistic objection, I'll
reiterate one of Hobbes' answer when he was accused of
"playing on words" : "Words are all we can discuss about".
Finally, about the metaphor : it was understood as a
metaphor, judged as a metaphor and finally dismissed
because it was a BAD metaphor, that only destroyed the
point you were trying to make. You could at least have the
honesty to admit it.
Anyway, I'm glad you enjoy the discussion here, but I
wonder if it's not only in the hope of sowing as much
confusion as you can. That's a kind of fun we can do
without, thank you.
Denis
HEALTH WARNING ON THIS NEXT ONE AS STRUAN GIVES AS GOOD AS
HE GETS - AND WHY NOT?
Denis, I waded through the same old tired argument about
there being no self, laughed at the
fundamentalist jibe, wondered what on earth makes you think
that I view the self as primary - I do
not, noted that for some bizarre reason you want me to say
which 'constituent' is the most important
when obviously it is all about context and nothing to do
with some simplistic notion that you
forward, understood that you reject human rights, believe
that the world is pre-ordained while
illogically and bizarrely lifting man out of that situation
so that he becomes a preserver of moral
order.
I then read you mis-representing Hinduism which DOES
believe in 'atman' or soul, followed by
your disgusting, almost fascist advocation of 'curing'
people guilty of 'not evolving.' By God, if
that is your definition of a crime you are dangerous and
sick individual. At that point I didn't
consider it worth proceeding on the grounds that your,
'option to those who wonder if (I) may be
right,' is so outrageously immoral, confused and perverted
that no decent person could have any time for it. On SOM
let me simply remind you that John Wooden Leg said, 'That's
a good dog.' That one sentence purifies the air of your
ridiculous linguistic objections here. Back to free will
and the
'man in a closed room' example was a metaphor as I have
pointed out before. It really is sad when
one can't even use a metaphor without some fool coming
along and taking it literally.
As for me taking this seriously. I do it for fun and
nothing else. I find postings like your last
one genuinely funny. How could you possibly think
otherwise?
Struan
_______________________________________________________
Vendez tout... aux enchères - http://www.caraplazza.com
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:00:38 BST