Hi Lithien and Squad
You wrote:
> thank you for answering my question to magnus, struan. that is my sense
of
> what MOQ is. even though, we may not recognize the moon as what our
> intellect has named it or categorizes, it still exists...it is out there.
> as i understand SOM, it is the naming of objects and placing them in
> catergories as in functions, etc that is what our reality consists of, but
> the things are there and exist. please, let me know how else to interpret
> SOM if that isnt the case.
Sorry for not answering directly, please read my reply to Struan but feel
free to pursue loose ends. About the SOM issue, Struan might not be the
one to ask, he usually strikes the ostrich pose whenever SOM comes up. :)
> that seems to me to be the problem: language. there are many things that
> happen out of my reality that still happen. for instance the downing of
> PamAm plane over Lockerbee, Scotland happened without my being aware of
it.
> was that not real?
But how can language be the problem right now? You were just using language
to convey your feelings about the Lockerbee downing. As I wrote earlier
to Struan, I think the problem lies in what we mean by "observation". If
observation means, "someONE observing something else", there is a problem.
Because then, the reality for that someONE, becomes only the things that
someONE observes. But if observation means "two patterns of value engaged
in a Quality Event", then the ice falling off the edges of the Antarctic
glacier a few seconds ago becomes as real as your reading these words.
Magnus
MOQ Homepage - http://www.moq.org
Mailing List Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Queries - mailto:moq@moq.org
Unsubscribe - mailto:majordomo@moq.org with
UNSUBSCRIBE MOQ_DISCUSS in the body of the email
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:50 BST