The "individual" cannot be defined unless the "group" is brought in.
As a concept, the individual only exists because we also have group.
What I can say is that we can take the "individual" as that which is
looking from the inside towards the outside. An individual cannot see
himself so to speak.
As you assert, the levels are an objective view, and have nothing to
do with the individual. But the levels are but one way to present
MoQ, so I wouldn't get to hung up on what is explicitly written. I
think the individual collaborates to create reality each and every
moment. If only one of the individuals went missing, then reality of
this moment would be incomplete. Therefor everybody has to
participate. Yes, even Marsha (heh, heh).
As I have posted many years ago, Will can exist without something to
express it. In fact our Will can be said to come from no where. For
what is expressing our will? We are Will. I prefer the word Intent,
actually, since Will has too many uses. So we are Intent. Evolution
is also Intent. We can imagining it happening right under our very
noses. Evolution is a process, not a thing, and a process can be
described by mode of action, will being such a description. For what
ever reason Evolution it imbues this universe (if for no other reason
than we say that it does). Quality is also Intent, for that matter,
but I do not want to confuse the group :-). For me to once again to
go there, will take some time for readers to be ready for it. My
reception on that idea before, was non-existent. More will be
revealed, as it is said.
Existence only exists on a backdrop. That backdrop can be considered
as non-existence. So when we speak of existence, it is in relation to
what it is not. I like to see it as a wave. So the crest is
existence and the trough is nonexistence. It goes back and forth like
a ping pong ball. This is how we can realize that we exist, for we
are always coming back from non-existence each and every moment. The
same analogy would work with quantum leaps in each moment, for what
are we leaping over? Take your pick, the analogue (wave) method or
the digital (quantum) method. So, existence does not include
nonexistence, but reality includes them both. There is nothing that
is not real. Even an illusion is something real; it is a real
On 2/22/12, Joseph Maurer <jhmau@comc...> wrote:
> Hi David and All,
> You mention a "God hypothesis" and other intriguing claims, but I did not
> see a reference to the evolution of levels in existence to describe
> individuality in reality.
> The individual cannot have defining existence but can be defined by the
> existence it has. Evolution is an interesting word. E(x) Voluntas, in
> Latin: From Will. Whose will? There has to be an order for Will to have
> any meaning. Order in evolution can be described in terms of levels in
> Is existence so all inclusive that only non-existence can measure up leaving
> the search for the reality in evolution outside of existence?
> On 2/22/12 11:59 AM, "David Thomas" <combinedefforts@eart...> wrote:
>> But I
>> think a "given" universe with me an integral part of it is much less
>> confusing. I can't imagine how to teach children in grade school the MoQ
>> when people here, many with college degrees, can't come to any common
>> agreement on what he says, let alone what he means. So I agree that Lila
>> confuses more than clarifies. And ZatAoMM, while intriguing, makes
>> claims,IMHO, that in the end will not and cannot be verified. Very
>> IMHO, to the God hypothesis.
> 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.