Hi Roger, Platt, Elephant, (Diana, Maggie) and all,
ROGER
> I agree with all this. I join Platt in applauding your clarity (which
> applies to both this thread and the Metaphor one btw). But, the question
> remains, ARE ATOMS AWARE? and DOES THE MOQ REQUIRE THE ANSWER TO BE "YES" TO
> HANG TOGETHER AS A VIABLE EXPLANATION OF REALITY?
>
> Let me know your thoughts.
Roger, I appreciate your focusing back to the question. We clearly agree in so
many areas, and yet I still don't fully understand if and how we have a
disagreement here over "atomic awareness".
Let me split your question:
1. Is atomic awareness necessary to explain reality?
NO - there are plenty of alternative metaphysical systems.
2. Is the idea of atomic awareness consistent with the MoQ?
YES - that's my opinion (and Platt's). Roger? Elephant?
3. Is the idea of atomic awareness NECESSARY for the MoQ?
I believe YES, but we each seem to have our own personal ways of understanding
it. Do we need an "authoritative" answer from RMP?
Let me explain. I think that the following words are all linked:
RESPONSIVE-SENSITIVE-EVALUATING-AWARE-SENTIENT-CONSCIOUS-INTELLIGENT
They may carry additional semantic baggage, but they share VALUE as common
element.
Have a look at this gem from 8 June 1998
http://www.moq.org/old_lilasquad/9806/0030.html
DIANA
>But doesn't P imply that all Quality is sentient?
>
>There's static sentience and dynamic sentience and the sentience of an
>atom is very different from the sentience of a Texan, but they are all
>types of experience and consequently value
The difference between atomic sentience and sentience of a Texan (e.g. G.W.
Bush;-) would be in the degree of self-reference. In my previous post, I
distinguished between awareness and SELF-awareness. This is something I did in
greater detail on 17 June 1998 -
http://www.moq.org/old_lilasquad/9806/0055.html
JONATHAN:
>This sentience business has caused a lot of trouble, so I want to put
>forward some thoughts about the different levels involved:-
>
>
>1. Sensitivity - e.g. ability of a molecule to absorb light of a
>particular colour.
>2. Responsiveness - e.g. the way an organism by light or smell
>3. Consciousness - Confers ability to act in ANTICIPATION of sense. e.g.
>running away from a skunk or a snake.
>4. Consciousness of consciousness - awareness of present and past
>consciousness or anticipatory acts.
>5. C of C of C - the realm of philosophers. Anyone who understands 4 has
>it.
>6. Higher levels (if anyone can make it to here ... COs I can't)
>
>As I see it, the jumps from 1 to 2 and 2 to 3 are the biggest and the
>most obviously important in the biological context.
>Modifications or suggestions most welcome!
Although I hadn't intended this as a blueprint for the levels themselves,
Maggie Hettinger (are you out there Maggie?) suggested just that, and put it
in her MoQ "levels" chart - it's still on-line at
http://www.members.iglou.com/hettingr/pirsig/LevelsChart.html
Let me leave it at that for now . . .
Jonathan
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
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 - 16:01:10 BST