I hear you, Andre.  Thanks.   - Marsha




Sent from my iPad

On Jan 27, 2012, at 2:19 PM, Andre <andrebroersen@gmai...> wrote:

> Marsha to Horse:
> If you think my approach so far has been a dismal failure, maybe you suggest a few strategies more to your liking.
>
> Marsha to dmb:
> I've certainly stated the stabilizing factor of static patterns, but they are also ever-changing.
>
> Andre:
> I am somewhat reluctant to butt in. I had hoped that Marsha would go to the 'peanut gallery' as she puts it ( still don't know what it means because she's still here) and rethink her 'intellectual' behavior on this discuss. It appears that, despite her question to Horse (which does not sound sincere in the least because of her addition of 'to your liking' [gawd this is pathetically childish]) her attitude has not changed. By that I mean the nonsense she continues to put forward due to my (and perhaps I am not alone in this) idea of not having read LILA properly.
>
> Marsha has resolved to continue in her 'old' ways. She may think that (given her 'skin' example) she has changed and continues to change, but the thing we see is still the repetition of a pattern of responding which can only be called stable/static. In other words: nothing has changed because the fundamental static pattern hasn't changed. In my copy of LILA, p 151, Phaedrus gives a good example of what is happening. With your permission I'll make it a bit more relevant to what is going on here between the various 'forces':
> "The static molecule (Marsha), an enormous, chemically 'dead,' plastic-like molecule called protein, SURROUNDS the Dynamic one (also Marsha)and prevents attack by forces of light, heat and other chemicals (dmb, myself and others) that would prey on its sensitivity and destroy it. The Dynamic one, called DNA, ( e.g.:Marsha's exploration of MOQ and Buddhism feeding her attitude and conviction already fixed) reciprocates by telling the static one what to do, replacing the static one when it wears out (battered by so much evidence to the contrary of her claims), replacing itself even when it hasn't worn out, and changing its own nature to overcome adverse conditions ( condescending: please Horse, if my approach has been a dismal failure so far, suggest a few strategies more to your liking). These two kinds of molecules, working together, are all there is in some viruses, which are the simplest forms of life.
> "This division of all biological evolutionary patterns into a Dynamic function and a static function continues on up through higher levels of evolution".(hence lots of human beings...Marsha you are not alone...we all do it to one degree or another!)
>
> Paraphrasing the rest: The stable pattern IS stable because it lets food in (what it needs to sustain itself, e.g my attitude) and keep poisons out (that which threatens its stability,attitude). This is called a static latch. It is designed to fight, tooth and nail any influence from 'outside' that threaten to change it. It does not want to be ever-changing, its job is to remain as stable as possible.
>
> I must add though that the 'Dynamic one' has little to do with DQ.
>
>
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org/md/archives.html