From: mel (mbtlehn@ix.netcom.com)
Date: Sat Nov 27 2004 - 17:21:23 GMT
Hello Chin,
In my reading of Eastern and Western thought
I've often thought that the approach of both was
incomplete in approaching SELF.
Western: "Middle east to Greek, and post
Christian" -ish
Eastern: "Hindu, Taoist, Shinto" -ish
Western seemed to look for a point of regression
in a chain of causation to indicate a monadic
irreducibility in being.
Eastern seemed to approach a whole sense of
mind and identity in the world and the carried
definition of role-with-life.
Western seemed to "cut it up" and Eastern
seemed to "toss a net over the whole."
The following of either definition has advantage and
tradition-based disadvantage, it seems. However,
insisting on either IS a wall, a barrier.
The BRIDGE seems to find its way in a place
where Husserl's phenomenology and
modern Existentialism, from the West
and Chan/Zen from the East "touch", if
you will.
Husserl "talks about" the experience of being.
Existentialists "defensively" point to it.
Chan/Zen "paradoxically" point to it.
Using these as High Static Quality "walls"
to aim at the "place" of Dynamic Quality
being is useful.
thanks--mel
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-moq_discuss@venus.co.uk
[mailto:owner-moq_discuss@venus.co.uk] On Behalf Of PhaedrusWolf@aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2004 3:44 PM
To: moq_discuss@moq.org
Subject: MD Self
The discussion of 'Self' is an interesting one, and since the MOQ (in my
belief) is tied to blending Western and Eastern thought, I thought it
might be a good idea to think about 'Self' and why there would be
differences of opinion as to whether 'Self' is or is not.
In Western thought, we might define 'Self' as essence of being. 'I' is
pertaining to this 'Self' as it describes what we are talking about.
Maybe Eastern thought is looking as 'Self' as defined the same. They may
be asking 'What is 'True Self'? Restated, the question might be "What is
the 'True' essence of being?"
My question would be can we come to an understanding of 'Self' that
would satisfy both Western Aristotelian slicing-n-dicing of the concept,
and the Eastern concept that may be more Platonic?
I could be wrong, but I would think this 'Self' could be a barrier to
the bridge between Western and Eastern philosophy.
What you think?
Chin
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 : Sat Nov 27 2004 - 23:13:58 GMT