Wim, Bo, others participating
On 30 Mar 2002 at 16:20, Wim Nusselder wrote:
Quality contains (consists of) static quality
>and Dynamic Quality and direct experience is identified with DQ. For
>the first time in metaphysical history direct experience gets the
>status of 'Reality' (even if shared with static quality)! Also for the
>first time intellect doesn't postulate something 'Real' that explains
>delusive direct experience. In stead it postulates an explaining
>mechanism (migration and latching of patterns of values) in which
>direct experience participates. It is not a passive explained category
>any more.
I’m sorry to interrupt, I did not follow the discussion because I haven’t
had I-net access for the last few months because I was working abroad. Wim
you state that it is the first time in in metaphysical history that direct
experience gets the status of reality, I don’t know if it really is
metaphysics but William James his Radical Empiricism is based on direct
experience being reality; ‘’My thesis is that if we start with the
supposition that there is only one primal stuff or material in the world, a
stuff of which everything is composed, and if we call that stuff ‘pure
experience’, the knowing can easily be explained as a particular sort of
relation towards one another into which portions of pure experience may
enter.’’(William James; Does ‘consciousness’ exist, first published in
Journal of Philosophy, Psychology and scientific methods 1904).
Wim:
Only direct experience, the 'cutting edge of
>experience' stays the same. Intellectual patterns of values with
>Subject-Object Metaphysics at their core create both objective and
>subjective 'reality'. Idealistic intellectual patterns of values
>consider subjective 'reality' to be 'Reality' that explains objective
>'reality' and direct experience, which they consider to be delusive.
>Materialist intellectual patterns of values on the other hand consider
>objective 'reality' to be 'Reality' that explains subjective 'reality'
>and direct experience, which they consider to be delusive.
As James describes it(if I understand you and James correctly); If you agree
that the perceptual object is not an idea within me, but that percept and
thing, as indistinguishably one, are really experienced there, outside, you
ought not to believe that the merely thought-of object is hid away inside of
the thinking subject’. (James; Does consciousness exist?)
Further I would strongly recommend reading this book from Wilber what I
believe is called ‘Without Boundaries’ which deals for a great part about
this ‘direct experience’.
Greetz Davor
_________________________________________________________________
Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
http://www.hotmail.com
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
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 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:09 BST