Dear Platt,
I will gladly answer your post in detail, but to give the short version,
nothing in your post requires discrete, living, subjective, conscious protons
and electrons. And as I have repeatedly stated, that is what our dictionaries
reveal you are saying if you require subatomic particles to be aware. Pirsig
built a metaphysics refuting this worldview, and he did it without saying
that the little buggers are aware.
And what is with the redefinition now of "awareness" away from conventional
usage and instead to 'experience'? If you wanted to say that atoms are
experience, or atoms are quality or atoms are value patterns, then why didn't
you say so? You said atoms are aware, and that the MOQ requires them to be
aware. I answered that they are patterns of value, and that it is the
baggage that comes with conventional usage of awareness that is the problem.
You now try (unsuccessfully btw) to redefine awareness to mean approximately
what I was saying, and then ask ME to refute it?
Odd.....
Let me start on a full response,
Rog
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 - 16:01:13 BST