Re: MD What is a person?

From: Nathan Pila (pila@sympatico.ca)
Date: Fri Oct 17 2003 - 21:46:55 BST

  • Next message: Nathan Pila: "Re: MD What is a person?"

    Johnny Moral,

    I want to believe you but can't seem to get my head around what you are
    saying. Neurologist, with the new technology (CAT, MRI etc)are getting
    insights into the functioning of the brain and it seems that consciousness
    is a result of different parts harmonizing and producing the sensation we
    call consciousness. I know this is not what you are saying and maybe the
    stuff I'm reading is incorrect. But I am glad you took the trouble to write
    me.

    This concept of consciousness is so intriguing. Would you like me to quote
    you some sources that I have found which give me pause?

    Nathan

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "johnny moral" <johnnymoral@hotmail.com>
    To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
    Sent: Friday, October 17, 2003 11:32 AM
    Subject: Re: MD What is a person?

    > Hi Nathan,
    >
    > I was saying (and I believe the MoQ says) the consciousness produces the
    > molecules and the color and the sensation, and consciousness is the
    > projection of an idea. So, we have an idea coming first and immediately
    > creating the consciousness and also the 'substance' of the idea out in the
    > created world (be it a molecule or sensation or a word or law - those are
    > all ideas). Ideas come from Quality (synonyms Morality and Reality) and
    so
    > are not free to be any old idea, but only the ideas that fit in with the
    > rest of Quality and come from Quality in a quality, harmonious, beautiful
    > way.
    >
    > johnny
    >
    >
    > >From: "Nathan Pila" <pila@sympatico.ca>
    > >Reply-To: moq_discuss@moq.org
    > >To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
    > >Subject: Re: MD What is a person?
    > >Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 20:10:54 -0400
    > >
    > >David,
    > >
    > >I love what you have written. It is too ridiculous and so parallels the
    > >universe. Consciousness is the final mystery. How a dance of molecules
    can
    > >produce the sensation of taste or colour or joy...... What is there to
    say?
    > >
    > >Nathan ( from Toronto; a new member of the list )
    > >----- Original Message -----
    > >From: "David MOREY" <us@divadeus.freeserve.co.uk>
    > >To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
    > >Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2003 6:08 PM
    > >Subject: Re: MD What is a person?
    > >
    > >
    > > > Hi all
    > > >
    > > > Maybe we are making a big mistake when we associate
    > > > our consciousness as being in our head, this is very theory based
    > > > idea, experientially our consciousness is a space full of entitities
    or
    > > > beings
    > > > or sounds, etc, with a sort of black hole in the middle that
    represents
    > > > where we imagine the inside of our body is. Please discuss.
    > > >
    > > > Maybe photons are conscious, and human visual consciousness occurs
    when
    > > > you collect lots of photons together in one place. Certainly, photons
    > >seem
    > > > to be information
    > > > carriers, could stars be conscious? Like us they are also very busy
    > >making
    > > > things.
    > > > Have I over done the whisky tonight?
    > > >
    > > > regards
    > > > David M
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > ----- Original Message -----
    > > > From: "johnny moral" <johnnymoral@hotmail.com>
    > > > To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
    > > > Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2003 7:32 PM
    > > > Subject: RE: MD What is a person?
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > > Hi folks, i'm back from my trip.
    > > > >
    > > > > This is a question I ponder a lot. I would say a person is a point
    of
    > > > > consciousness, located morally in morality in what we call a person
    > >and
    > > > > conscious of what that person would be conscious of, given its
    > >location
    > >in
    > > > > morality. Moral patterns produce ideas of a surrounding outside
    > >world,
    > > > and
    > > > > at the same time the consciousness (and person) that "has" the idea,
    > > > > according to the strength and quality of the patterns, as measured
    by
    > >all
    > > > > the individual consciousnesses together. Ponderous?
    > > > >
    > > > > >dmb says:
    > > > > >As I understand it, Static patterns can't "respond directly" to DQ
    > > > >
    > > > > What does respond to DQ then? What else is there?
    > > > >
    > > > > >The mainstream Christian tradition puts a great deal of stress upon
    > > > > >the individual's personal salvation and otherwise takes personhood
    > >quite
    > > > > >seriously. Contrasted with the East, where there is no self, the
    > > > difference
    > > > > >is quite stark.
    > > > >
    > > > > Mainstream Buddhism also puts a great deal of stress on personal
    > >"right"
    > > > > behavior and personal attainment of Nirvana, which is attained in
    both
    > > > east
    > > > > and west when one realizes that there is no self and sees the
    > >sovereignity
    > > > > of God. I think contrasting religions is a divisive activity. It's
    > >so
    > > > much
    > > > > more fruitful to see what they have in common.
    > > > >
    > > > >
    > > > >
    > > > >
    > > > >
    > > > > >From: David Buchanan <DBuchanan@ClassicalRadio.org>
    > > > > >Reply-To: moq_discuss@moq.org
    > > > > >To: "'moq_discuss@moq.org'" <moq_discuss@moq.org>
    > > > > >Subject: RE: MD What is a person?
    > > > > >Date: Sun, 12 Oct 2003 19:23:01 -0600
    > > > > >
    > > > > >Sam and Paul and all MOQers,
    > > > > >
    > > > > >Sam said:
    > > > > >To my mind, a person is a stable pattern of values existing at the
    > >fourth
    > > > > >level, an 'autonomous
    > > > > >individual' - ie one in whom there resides an independent response
    to
    > > > > >Quality (DQ) which is not
    > > > > >mediated through the previously existing static forms (the social
    > >level
    > > > > >static latches). It is
    > > > > >precisely the ability to respond directly to Quality, and therefore
    > >not
    > > > to
    > > > > >be 'controlled' - ie
    > > > > >repeating the static social norms - which marks out the change in
    > >level
    > > > > >from
    > > > > >social to level 4.
    > > > > >
    > > > > >dmb says:
    > > > > >As I understand it, Static patterns can't "respond directly" to DQ
    > >and
    > >it
    > > > > >is
    > > > > >not possible for there to be such a thing as intellect without the
    > >other
    > > > > >three levels. As Paul pointed out, a fourth level person, by
    > >definition,
    > > > is
    > > > > >a forest of sq from all four levels. I think the transition from
    > >third
    > >to
    > > > > >fourth level static values generally proceeds in a static fashion,
    > >when
    > > > > >some
    > > > > >kind of crisis is reached. When the problems of that level can't be
    > > > solved
    > > > > >at that level, when it becomes apparent that the next level is
    > >something
    > > > we
    > > > > >need, a little breakthrough occurs. Or something like that. In any
    > >case,
    > > > > >the
    > > > > >important point here is that intellect can't respond to DQ
    directly.
    > >An
    > > > > >unmediated experience is a mystical experience and, as I understand
    > >it,
    > > > > >this
    > > > > >is a state where such static patterns have been put to sleep or
    > >otherwise
    > > > > >clear out of the way.
    > > > > >
    > > > > >Sam said:
    > > > > >In other words, our sense of self is not ultimate; it is
    potentially
    > >lost
    > > > > >in
    > > > > >'divine union'.
    > > > > >(Although the Christian tradition would also want to claim some
    sort
    > >of
    > > > > >ultimate reality to
    > > > > >personhood; this is one of the key contrasts with Eastern religion,
    > >as
    > >I
    > > > > >understand it).
    > > > > >
    > > > > >dmb says:
    > > > > >Right. The mainstream Christian tradition puts a great deal of
    stress
    > > > upon
    > > > > >the individual's personal salvation and otherwise takes personhood
    > >quite
    > > > > >seriously. Contrasted with the East, where there is no self, the
    > > > difference
    > > > > >is quite stark. But most of that is a cultural difference and the
    > > > > >difference
    > > > > >is softened by several degrees when we compare Buddhism and the
    more
    > > > > >esoteric mystical tradition within Christianity. As I tried to
    point
    > >out
    > > > in
    > > > > >the "letter from Pirsig" thread, both the Buddha and the Christ can
    > >be
    > > > seen
    > > > > >as metaphors for the letting go of the self, of ego-consciousness,
    of
    > > > > >intellect. Not to milk the joke, but I'd like to remind you that
    this
    > >is
    > > > > >why
    > > > > >they all die in the end.
    > > > > >
    > > > > >(Interesting note: A few months back I heard a radio interview with
    > > > Richard
    > > > > >Nisbett, who was talking about his book, "THE GEOGRAPHY OF THOUGHT:
    > >How
    > > > > >Asians and Westerners Think Differently....and Why". The thing that
    > >has
    > > > > >stuck in my mind was his observation that one of the main
    differences
    > >was
    > > > > >the individuality of the West and that it exist on an almost
    perfect
    > > > > >geographic continuum, so that San Fransisco and Los Angeles are at
    > >one
    > > > > >extreme end and Toykyo is at the other. Funny that Zen has been so
    > > > popular
    > > > > >on the West Coast, huh?)
    > > > > >
    > > > > >Sam said:
    > > > > > ...In other words, I think the 'dissolving' of identity, which
    > >is
    > > > > >referred to in the
    > > > > >great religious traditions, in various ways, is the transition
    > >between
    > > > the
    > > > > >fourth level pattern of
    > > > > >values and DQ. Whereas I think that you (and Pirsig) see this
    > >dissolution
    > > > > >of
    > > > > >personality as being
    > > > > >the transition between a level 3 stable pattern of values (the
    > >'social
    > > > > >self', or possibly the ego)
    > > > > >and the realm of level 4. ...We just place that dissolution at
    > >different
    > > > > >points on the scale.
    > > > > >
    > > > > >dmb says:
    > > > > >Hmmm. No, I'm pretty sure Pirsig's idea of matches the great
    > >religious
    > > > > >traditions and sees it as, not a transition between the 4th level
    and
    > >DQ,
    > > > > >but a dissolution of all static patterns. You know, be a dead man
    and
    > >all
    > > > > >that. The unmediated experience is one that lets go of whatever
    > >static
    > > > > >patterns hold the self together. Its the ultimate emptying out of
    > >one's
    > > > cup
    > > > > >so that one is naked or transparent or something. So I think it
    > >doesn't
    > > > > >matter which point of the scale, because the whole deal is supposed
    > >to
    > >go
    > > > > >away for a while.
    > > > > >
    > > > > >Sam says:
    > > > > >In other words, I think it is true and accurate to say that there
    is
    > >no
    > > > > >'thing' - understood
    > > > > >in SOM terms as a scientifically describable entity - which
    > >corresponds
    > > > to
    > > > > >the mind. However I do
    > > > > >think that there is a stable pattern of values - a person in all
    > >their
    > > > > >infinite variety and
    > > > > >stability, of habits, language, culture and personality - which is
    > >both
    > >a
    > > > > >source of independent
    > > > > >judgement and open to dynamic evolution at a higher level than that
    > >of
    > > > > >society, which can in fact go
    > > > > >off on purposes of its own.
    > > > > >
    > > > > >dmb says:
    > > > > >As a fellow Westerner I defininately know what you mean. Nothing is
    > > > harder
    > > > > >than giving up the sense of self. And most of the time it would be
    > >wildly
    > > > > >immoral and irresponsible to do so. But, as I understand it, that
    > >sense
    > > > of
    > > > > >self is exactly the #1 obstacle to "enlightenment". That's why we
    > >must
    > > > die,
    > > > > >must be "born again" and all that. One of the reasons I liked the
    > >film
    > > > LAST
    > > > > >TEMPTATION OF CHRIST was that it showed the anguish involved in
    > >having
    > >to
    > > > > >give up nothing more nor less than a "normal" life. The most
    tempting
    > > > thing
    > > > > >of all, the temptation that nearly compelled him off the cross was
    > > > nothing
    > > > > >more grandiose than a normal family life, with a house, a wife and
    > > > > >children.
    > > > > >Campbell describes this as the temptation of "the blandishments of
    > >the
    > > > > >world". But if desire is the cause of all suffering and the goal is
    > >to
    > > > > >extinguish desire and let go of all attachments, then surely the
    > >desire
    > > > to
    > > > > >have a normal life is to be extinquished too. Its radical, I know.
    > >But
    > >I
    > > > > >think that's what it says.
    > > > > >
    > > > > >Thanks,
    > > > > >dmb
    > > > > >
    > > > > >
    > > > > >
    > > > > >
    > > > > >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
    > > > > >
    > > > >
    > > > > _________________________________________________________________
    > > > > See when your friends are online with MSN Messenger 6.0. Download it
    > >now
    > > > > FREE! http://msnmessenger-download.com
    > > > >
    > > > >
    > > > >
    > > > > 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
    > > >
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > >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
    > >
    >
    > _________________________________________________________________
    > Get 10MB of e-mail storage! Sign up for Hotmail Extra Storage.
    > http://join.msn.com/?PAGE=features/es
    >
    >
    >
    > 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 : Fri Oct 17 2003 - 22:52:47 BST