From: Ron Winchester (phaedruswolff@hotmail.com)
Date: Wed Feb 16 2005 - 01:16:59 GMT
Ron shows his ignorance;
"The nothingness that we don't understand was proven by Quantum Physics"
Scott;
While I think your use of the word "proven" is a gross overstatement, I
think there is some relation with mystical talk on nothingness and quantum
physics, but I'd like you to expand on how you see it.
Hi Scott,
The word 'Proven' is a gross overstatement, and should be excluded from
philosophical language. :o)
That was a slip on my part. I should never have said proven.
As I see it, the nothingness of non-deity Zen is the same as the void,
nothingness, or 'Quantum Soup.' It is all theory, and as like every theory
we have had prior, such as Aether have been 'Reconsidered' (as opposed to
disproven:)
The only compliment of Quantum Physics to Nothingness of Zen is that both
Quantum Physics and Zen have realized that they do not 'Know' what this
nothingness consists of. Any knowledge we have is temporary. All we think we
know is that everything came from this Nothingness for lack of a word
because it cannot be described.
Let's just say that Quantum Physics leads us to think a bit closer toward
Eastern philosophy, or what can be termed as spirituality.
On empirical and SOM, and the MOQ being stuck on SOM in its use of the word
empirical, is that I see you accepting, or being confused that a Mystic
Experience is something other than enlightenment as to how the world is,
that does not come from some 'Out There' field or force.
The difference between enlightenment and the Christian Mystical Experience
is that you know prior to the experience what you are going to experience
when you are looking for the Virgin Mary. An Enlightened Mystical Experience
is something that comes to you from what I would call 'Within.'
I have been warned about using the term intuition, but I am thinking we
already have within us the knowledge, but just do not see it as we are
preconditioned to a belief system that was built into us from childhood on.
The mystical experience in Eastern spirituality comes from separating
ourselves from our prejudices as to what we "Think we know.' Quantum Physics
lend to this in the 'Knower and the Known' that you mentioned before are the
same. Eastern spirituality does not tell us what to look for in a mystical
experience. Quantum Soup is simply an extenstion to the idea that this
nothingness can not be known; it has no characteristics that we can
understand.
('Quantum Soup' is just slang thrown at the physicists for their lack of
ability to accept something that cannot be proven)
Thinking of Quantum Soup brings me to some thoughts about 'Emprical Data.'
It seems to me that in most fields, the use of the term 'Empirical Data' is
more of an insult thrown toward the Empiricists, or those who depend too
much on what is considered emprical data.
Ron
>From: "Scott Roberts" <jse885@localnet.com>
>Reply-To: moq_discuss@moq.org
>To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
>Subject: Re: MD Pure experience and the Kantian problematic
>Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 12:21:47 -0700
>
>Ron,
>
>Ron said: This is where I see the difficulty Scott is having with
>empiricism.
>
>Scott:
>You see wrong. Like DMB, you take what I say and then add humongous
>assumptions to what I say and argue on the basis of those erroneous
>assumptions. I then have to spend a ridiculous amount saying "that's not
>what I said". Somehow, you have interpreted my objecting to Pirsig's
>expansion of the word 'empiricism' to the belief that I think that changing
>the usage of all words is a bad thing. In my first post about this subject
>I
>explicitly denied that.
>
>You have some notion of what I think about mystical events, but I'm not
>even
>sure what it is. Do you think that I think that all mystical events are
>equally valid or invalid? That a vision of the Virgin Mary should be
>treated
>the same as Zen satori? I do not.
>
>You seem to think that I am stuck in SOM prejudices. I think the MOQ is
>stuck in SOM prejudices, for example, in calling itself "empirical". If we
>are going to debate this you have got to resist your tendency to go off on
>big rambles based on wrong assumptions about what I think. If you're not
>sure what I think, then ask, and I will clarify as well as I can.
>
>Meanwhile, I am curious about this sentence:
>
>"The nothingness that we don't understand was proven by Quantum Physics"
>
>While I think your use of the word "proven" is a gross overstatement, I
>think there is some relation with mystical talk on nothingness and quantum
>physics, but I'd like you to expand on how you see it.
>
>- Scott
>
>
>
>
>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
>
_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE!
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
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 : Wed Feb 16 2005 - 01:55:19 GMT