Hi all,
On 31 May 2002 at 21:40, elliot hallmark wrote:
> >(bo)Intellectual value won't have anything to do with "mysticism".
>
> Elliot:
> Then where does mysticism fit in? With the MoQ's focus on mysticism, where
> does the MoQ fit in? Mysticism is clearly not social because it is very,
> very personal and notions of society disolve in mystical experience. thus
> as intel beings, whatever we do is nessicarily intel (or social or
> biological, but mysticism is neither of these).
Mysticism would be pure dynamic quality, no? In so far as it is an experience beyond
society or intellect, it is dynamic quality. If that experience leads one to have a
reformation of ideas then we interpret the experience as intellect, but it is not
intellect. If that experience leads one to modify or ignore social patterns then we
interpret that experience as social, but it is not social.
> Also, mysticism is
> concerned primarily with symbols and our understanding of the world as
> symbolic, as "only a description".
Isn't this exactly what mysticism is attempting to avoid? An experience that is difficult
to explain because the symbols we have can't capture the experience. The map isn't
the terrain. Mysticism (quality?) is that which is before intellect or society...it is what
shapes intellect or society after we attempt to understand it. I think. Maybe. ;)
-peter
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
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 - 16:02:18 BST