From: Sam Norton (elizaphanian@kohath.wanadoo.co.uk)
Date: Mon Mar 14 2005 - 13:42:30 GMT
Hi DMB,
Previously, on Desperate Housewives.....
I've changed the subject heading, for obvious reasons, not least that those
who find our debate boring will find it easy to tune out.
But what exactly are we arguing about? Surely you've not just discovered
your sensitive side and are grumbling that I've discovered my rude side? I'm
sincerely interested in how to 'crack' our dialogue, coz so often we talk
past each other. I had thought we'd made a bit of progress in that you
seemed to accept that Christian mysticism was different to philosophical
mysticism, but now you seem to be backtracking on that. So, which bit of our
discussion are you most interested in revisiting? Let's look at some
options:
1. Philosophical mysticism is 'Jamesian' (aka SOM). This is where I need to
answer your assertion that what James is doing is what Plotinus was doing.
Which at some point I might do, but Scott's already done quite a bit, it
seems to me.
2. Philosophical mysticism is present in all world religions, rather than
brought in by the intellectual assumptions of the observer.
3. My interest in the MoQ is illegitimate because there is no correspondence
between Christianity and the MoQ. (Which contradicts 2 I think - but hey,
who cares about consistency these days?)
4. The status of the ego as an illusion, or whether there is something as
real as an 'apple' there, and how that fits in to a metaphysics.
I'm sure there are others. I just need to prioritise my attention a bit.
Where do you want to go to today?
Sam
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 Mar 14 2005 - 13:47:15 GMT