all I see from this is more smoke, you avoid addressing things -- READ THE
REFS
ciao,
Chris.
------------------
Chris Lofting
websites:
http://www.eisa.net.au/~lofting
http://www.ozemail.com.au/~ddiamond
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-moq_discuss@venus.co.uk
> [mailto:owner-moq_discuss@venus.co.uk]On Behalf Of PzEph
> Sent: Tuesday, 12 December 2000 5:57
> To: moq_discuss@moq.org
> Subject: Re: MD the particular, the general, EITHER/OR, BOTH/AND
>
>
> ELEPHANT TO CHRIS:
>
> No, Chris, I've not run away. More if you need it. I was simply saying
> that I had now said everthing I could think of to say on the bizare idea
> that judgements are determined by "oscillations" in the brain hemispheres,
> and the plain dumb idea that something is continuous when it is a long
> series. I can think of new ways to point these things out if necessary.
> Will it be necessary?
>
> There will come a time when I have to let you say "scaredy cat! scaredy
> cat!" at my back as I walk away in despairation and boredom. We're not
> quite there yet because I'm still annoyed with your whole approach.
>
> Pzeph,
>
> (Off to anger management classes in the morning)
>
> > From: "Chris Lofting" <ddiamond@ozemail.com.au>
> > Reply-To: moq_discuss@moq.org
> > Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2000 23:33:40 +1100
> > To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
> > Subject: RE: MD the particular, the general, EITHER/OR, BOTH/AND
> >
> > E you chickened out! :-) predictable in the context of my sending you
> > reference material IOW somebody elses words not mine but you
> dont/wont read
> > them ... and you come up with rubbish re neocortical function
> etc tsk tsk
> > what a cop out. you should be ashamed of yourself .. but then I
> suppose if
> > you have spent so much time refining a position to then have it
> threatened
> > ... well .. I suppose you have to back away dont you. Pity. If
> you dont like
> > my writing or understand it etc well then at LEAST read the
> references ...
> > none of which are sourced to me so I have not 'infected' them
> :-) For work
> > on hemisphere functions and frequency processing see the refs
> (or even --
> > shock horror! try and READ carfully, if need be many times)
> > http://www.eisa.net.au/~lofting/general.html as well as the
> refs I included
> > on my email. Make the effort, open your eyes, ears etc BURN
> Plato and all
> > texts and start again working from what we now know as to how we process
> > information, how we can live illusions/delusions etc and what
> can develop
> > from that.
> >
> > To get an idea you need to 'kill' history, kill the feedback
> processes 'in
> > here', there is too much of it and it is drowning understanding
> (as well as
> > the court systems where an ever increasing amount of precedence is
> > paralysing court decisions etc -- need to cull some things...
> :-)) Note that
> > this implies more discernment.
> >
> > This is not my 'junk' science, it is all 'good' science,
> perhaps you prefer
> > to call it junk due to the connotations of some of the work re
> values etc
> > but then you have your agenda.
> >
> > Me? well I just point to patterns behind the words and that includes the
> > structuring of MOQ etc
> > I demonstrate (if you bothered to read carefully) HOW we find meaning,
> > create meaning and with that senses of value etc
> >
> > For example the I Ching (Book of Changes) has been a strong influence on
> > Eastern thought, especially Chinese, Korean, Japanese. It is
> 'respected', it
> > is seen to have 'value' and be 'of quality' but the failure has
> been to not
> > (or to refuse) to go behind it and see how it could be created.
> >
> >> From CURRENT neurological and psychological research we can start to
> > identify the source of these sorts of belief systems, how these
> metaphors
> > are interpreted literally.
> >
> > BUT to appreciate it you need to do some background reading --
> I have given
> > you refs and you seem to reject them or refuse to read them --
> that to me
> > shows FEAR, a concern with change, a NEED to retain one's position
> > regardless of 'truths'. Very 'object' thinking, very 'us' vs 'them',
> > archetypal, classical perspective. Nothing wrong with it other
> than it can
> > cause problems if you try and take it beyond its place.
> >
> > Philosophy without understanding how we function as a species, how we
> > process data and develop, is illusion, you might as well read
> entrails...
> > TAKE THE TIME TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IS HAPPENING INBETWEEN YOUR
> EARS. READ THE
> > REFS at http://www.ozemail.com.au/~ddiamond/brefs.html
> >
> > Get into the summary material (e.g. LEFT BRAIN, RIGHT BRAIN now
> in its 5th
> > edition). Look at Scott-Kelso's "DYNAMIC PATTERNS" dealing with
> > complexity/chaos 'in here'. Go through the Spencer-Brown and
> Kaufmann/Varela
> > refs, Go to Jack Pedigrew's site re hemisphere switching --
> FIND THINGS OUT
> > rather than giving me crap like "Anyway, I thought all this left/right
> > business went out of fashion years ago."
> >
> > This sort of remark to me shows an amazing degree of ignorance
> from a person
> > who seems to try and present themselves as 'refined' and 'of quality' --
> > GROW UP! you have a good mind, dont waste away with it.
> >
> > MAKE THE TIME. FORGET READING PLATO FOR THE Nth TIME -- HE
> LACKS PRECISION
> > and as such can CLOUD thinking. Move up 2000 years with a clear
> mind; the
> > ancients did good jobs with the tools they had but to maintain them, to
> > present them as if 'superior' to now shows total ignorance; it
> shows a sort
> > of NEED to retain identity through understanding antiques.
> >
> > If you burn them then over time the same qualitative elements will
> > re-emerge, the sense of quality is not lost other than that
> reflected in the
> > particular but that particular only retains its quality as long as it is
> > remembered .. and then that memory gets passed on the other
> generations and
> > it all becomes 'traditional', we lose sight of the original intent, the
> > original determination of quality.
> >
> > As you can see I think your note was full of 'rubbish' (as you seemed to
> > find mine) except that mine pointed to REAL EVENTS happening
> NOW and they
> > are USEFUL in understanding, in helping us to move on.
> >
> > Antiques are useful in establishing a sense of quality, they
> help us with
> > learning discernment but there is NO WAY you can fully
> appreciate what is
> > going on 'in here' without understanding the neurosciences work and that
> > included observing the expressions we use to describe
> object/relationships
> > interactions (aka the WHAT/WHERE dichotomy -- you are not
> familiar with it?
> > READ THE REFS -- FIND OUT FOR YOURSELF).
> >
> > Chris.
> > ------------------
> > Chris Lofting
> > websites:
> > http://www.eisa.net.au/~lofting
> > http://www.ozemail.com.au/~ddiamond
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 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
> >
> >
>
>
>
> 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
>
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 - 16:00:54 BST