From: David Morey (us@divadeus.freeserve.co.uk)
Date: Thu Aug 12 2004 - 22:16:01 BST
"I mean we believe the world continues to exist while we sleep. I don't
know
what we are thinking as we sleep, we just believe, while awake, that the
world will continue to exist "out there", independently of our thinking of
it, while we sleep. It is a high quality belief, perhaps the highest (and
it is called SOM)."
Well Johnny, maybe not, how about believing that the propensity
of known patterns persist whilst I sleep, and yes they are there
when I wake up, that is MOQ not SOM as we have replaced
objects with SQ patterns, remember!
David M
----- Original Message -----
From: "johnny moral" <johnnymoral@hotmail.com>
To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2004 6:50 PM
Subject: Re: [Spam] Re: MD the metaphysics of free enterprise
> Hi Platt
>
> >I'm glad I don't have to depend on public records (which can be forged)
or
> >my mother, doctor, etc. (all dead) for my existence.
>
> You do have to depend on your mother for your existence, you self-centered
> freak! You have to depend on someone noticing you, at least once, to
exist.
> Or, perhaps, deducing your existence from other evidence. I maintain
that
> if there was no evidence for a person's existence, if no woman ever
> experienced giving birth to a postulated person and no one ever noticed a
> person, then that person does not exist. You seem to be implying that
> people can just materialize into existence, like I can suddenly have a 30
> year old younger brother even though no such person ever existed before.
I
> think my mother would know if there was such a person out there.
>
> > > Besides, you are a consciousness, part of the human consciousness that
> > > creates everything, so while you are alone you are still creating the
> >world
> > > and being created by patterns of morality.
> >
> >In other words, there's I who creates me? Who is this I? If I identify
> >this I, who is doing the identifying? Another I? How many "I's" must I
> >postulate.
>
> OK, no, the patterns are always what is creating you and at the same time
> they are using the locus of consciousness they create ("you") to continue
> their own existence by having you expect them into the future. You would
> not be born into consciousness but for other "I"s expecting you to be a
> consciousness. The other "I"'s are not you, they are me and the rest of
us,
> living, dead, and not yet born - in other words, all of Morality expects a
> new baby to be conscious, to be one of us. Morality creates new people,
new
> locii of consciousness.
>
> > > David M wrote:
> > > >How about from the other side. Take sensory deprivation,
> > > >it seems to destroy the experience of an SOM type.
> > > >Does this seems to have important implications about
> > > >the relationship between being and sense?
> > >
> > > Sense just senses for a small sample of time, and the world in between
> > > those senses is filled in by our minds according to our beliefs.
Thus,
> > > while we are asleep or in a sensory deprivation tank, our minds
believe
> > > that things contnue to exist.
> >
> >How can you possibly know that minds believe that things continue to
exist
> >when we're asleep?
>
> I mean we believe the world continues to exist while we sleep. I don't
know
> what we are thinking as we sleep, we just believe, while awake, that the
> world will continue to exist "out there", independently of our thinking of
> it, while we sleep. It is a high quality belief, perhaps the highest (and
> it is called SOM).
>
> > > I'm surprised this idea, that existence and being come from experience
> >and
> > > don't actually exist "out there", meet resistance? How can one
accept
> > > Lila without agreeig with this?
> >
> >I'm surprised you don't see that experience must necessarily exist before
> >existence and being can "come from experience."
>
> Expectation (Morality) preceeds existence, and experience is simultaneous
> with existence of subject and object. Once subject/object experience
> happens, that experience becomes expectation that both subject and object
> will be repeated.
>
> >You have accounted for
> >the existence of the cart (existence and being) but ignored the existence
> >and being of the horse.
>
> The horse and cart are Morality. Are you saying the horse is DQ, by any
> chance? Maybe there's a large horn on its head, too?
>
> >Your argument appears circular: experience that
> >creates existence is by existence created.
>
> Correct, it is circular, like Yin-Yang, Being-ahead-of-itself, etc. If
you
> are wondering where the circle started, back at the beginning of time,
there
> is much agreement about this - it started with the Word, Morality,
> Expectation, Undifferentiated Quality. This was at the beginning, when
time
> began, with the first experience of Quality. (I say this was about 10,000
> years ago, and the 15 Billion years before that was created quite recently
> in order to make our world make sense, to make our highest quality beliefs
> consistent and keep Morality going)
>
> Platt, I think you are tilting at windmills here, why are you arguing with
> me? You know that the MoQ says that SOM is merely a very high quality
idea,
> right? (Not "merely", but awesomely, gloriously and essentially) You
> aren't wrong to call SOM true and say that we are "really" here, but this
is
> a philosophy forum! About the MoQ! Philosophically, there is nothing
"out
> there", we are not existing subjects and objects, existence depends on
> concsiousness, belief, expectation, faith, and Morality. You are trying
to
> assert SOM comes first! Makes me think you are just using the bits of the
> MoQ you like as some sort of Ayn Randian prop to promote individualism and
> elitism, but you don't really want to understand it philosophically.
>
> Johnny
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> On the road to retirement? Check out MSN Life Events for advice on how to
> get there! http://lifeevents.msn.com/category.aspx?cid=Retirement
>
>
>
> 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 : Thu Aug 12 2004 - 23:19:42 BST