Re: MD On Transcendence

From: David Morey (us@divadeus.freeserve.co.uk)
Date: Sun Nov 14 2004 - 11:09:55 GMT

  • Next message: MarshaV: "Re: MD Why I'm here - Mindful Universe."

    Hi DMB

    Thanks, I found that useful.

    DM

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "David Buchanan" <DBuchanan@ClassicalRadio.org>
    To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
    Sent: Saturday, November 13, 2004 11:00 PM
    Subject: RE: MD On Transcendence

    > Ham, Sam, Chuck, David, Marsha, Mel, Scott and all silent MOQers:
    >
    > Ever hear the one about the schizophrenic Buddhist who sought to become
    > TWO
    > with the cosmos?
    >
    > David Morey's question:
    > Is there any use for the concept of transcendence in the MOQ? If not is
    > this
    > an error in the MOQ? If not an error why not?
    >
    > HAM replied:
    > The MOQ is indeed in error by failing to posit a transcendent reality,
    > while
    > allowing us to infer one. ............transcending does not mean simply
    > encompassing higher and higher levels of physical reality, ad infinitum.
    > It
    > signifies a different reality altogether. ...The whole point of
    > metaphysics
    > is to answer what is the Essential Reality? What lies beyond existence?
    > ...Quality does not transcend the physical world, which means that it is
    > contingent upon a subject-object duality. This is precisely why I continue

    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 : Sun Nov 14 2004 - 13:39:17 GMT