Hi Bo:
> Funnily enough, in an article concerning sleep and dream my favourite
> "epiphany" was mentioned: All creatures sleep .... but the inevitable
> conclusion that they must "wake up" to a state different from sleep was not
> drawn. Forgive me for constantly returning to this point, but it is so
> outrageous and I can't understand it being neglected. One CAN'T wake up
> from unconsciousness unless it is to consciousness, but the SOM postulates
> a special kind - the so-called selfconsciousness. In the MOQ this means
> that animals wake up to biological consciousness and the human beings to
> the whole range of consciousnesses, not the absolute insight it sounds
> like, and that there are consciousness waiting to be entered ...but please
> no Wilberian "spiritual" realms.
I don't mean to imply by not showing all of your post that the rest of it
wasn't good. It was all good. But, what really struck me hard was your
use of the word "consciousnesses" in the above. Rarely, if ever will one
see "consciousness" in plural form. In fact, I don't recall ever seeing it
used by the intellectual coterie. What a great way of looking at the
MOQ static levels, as different levels of consciousness with an inorganic
consciousness, a biological consciousness, a social consciousness
(not to be confused with "social conscience" appealed to by left wing
types) and intellectual consciousness (meaning seeing "reality" as
separate and independent of the seer, or self-consciousness). Another
great insight from you, Bo, at least for me. Thanks!
Platt
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
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 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:28 BST