Re: MD MOQ, Intellect, DQ and Woman

From: Joseph Maurer (jhmau@sbcglobal.net)
Date: Mon Aug 09 2004 - 20:10:32 BST

  • Next message: Dan Glover: "Re: MD Proposal to discuss a Metaphysics of Value"

    On 6 Aug 2004 2:48 PM MarshaV writes to Mark:

    MarshaV:

    I still think the gender specific word, God, is dangerous because it is confining. God (him, he) is an incomplete concept. This word is wrong whether used by philosophers, the Pope or the Dali Lama. If God is masculine, where does that leave things that are feminine?

    Hi MarshaV and all

    joe: hi MarshaV I'm Joe. On 05 July 2004 or thereabouts in a message re subject: "MD SQ-SQ tensions in human relationships (again)", I remarked to Mark M that he had started a 'contentions subject'. I used the example of the squabbles my wife and I have had about the difference between men and women to reach that conclusion. In my experience God is gender specific.

    I must revise my thinking as the social order dynamic of existence is not gender specific. Only in existence do I find god. Mother, father, offspring are of the social order. I was taught badly.

    Joe Maurer

      ----- Original Message -----
      From: MarshaV
      To: moq_discuss@moq.org
      Sent: Friday, August 06, 2004 2:08 PM
      Subject: Re: MD MOQ, Intellect, DQ and Woman

      Hi Mark,

      Thanks. I'm happy to be back.

      You stated, "The term God has specific meaning in philosophy, it is that which nothing exceeds." I think the term god has the same specific meaning in religion. But, a Christian philosopher, for example, would also believe "God" is a personal god. One who may have influence on the lives of humans. Seems to me 'the existence of a God' has been a major debate in Western Philosophy for centuries. The problems with the 'existence of evil' are also based on there being a personal God. The meaning you stated is too simplistic for all Philosophy.

      What is "God's" relationship to MOQ? What is "God's" relationship to the Intellectual Level, the highest level?

      I still think the gender specific word, God, is dangerous because it is confining. God (him, he) is an incomplete concept. This word is wrong whether used by philosophers, the Pope or the Dali Lama. If God is masculine, where does that leave things that are feminine?

      MarshaV

        At 12:37 PM 8/6/2004 -0400, you wrote:

        Hi Marsha,
        I have not read any of the above.
        The term God has specific meaning in philosophy, it is that which nothing exceeds. How theologians get from that to organised religious terminology is something i do not understand.
        In the world of organised religion, God is really rather absent don't you feel?!!!!
        In fact, organised religion has virtually nothing to do with God at all, and appears to be a collection of social patterns established to maintain a patriarchal political system.
        I was watching a TV programme about the development of the Houses of Parliament the other night, and so much of the ritual still in use is borrowed from the church. Even today our government is buried in the patriarchal past...

        Nice to see ya back,
        Mark
      MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org Mail Archives: Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/ Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at: http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html

    MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
    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 2.1.5 : Mon Aug 09 2004 - 20:23:48 BST