Re: MD Pure experience and the Kantian problematic

From: Scott Roberts (jse885@localnet.com)
Date: Wed Feb 09 2005 - 18:30:45 GMT

  • Next message: Matt Kundert: "Re: MD Pure experience and the Kantian problematic"

    Marsha,

    Marsha said:
    Originally your statement was "Intellect, Consciousness, and Quality are all names for the same (non-)thing." Now your saying that they are not the same, but at "any event" Quality, Consciousness and Intellect are present. Is that correct? Are all three always present?

    Since you are now saying that Intellect, Consciousness and Quality are not the same (non thing), they must mean something different. Would you please define the meaning of each as you are using them in your theory.

    Scott:
    A fair request, since I confused things by moving from the formless to form. In the first statement ("Intellect, Consciousness, and Quality are all names for the same (non-)thing." ) I am aligning myself with mystics such as Eckhart and Nagarjuna, whose names for the same (non-)thing are "the godhead" and "emptiness" respectively. So I am saying that Intellect, Consciousness, and Quality are also names for this. As such they are all pointers to this (non-)thing, meaning that if we ask "what is Consciousness (or Intellect, or Quality)", the answer is the same: they are undefinable since they are not "made up" of something else, but instead are that which "makes up" all the form with which we are accustomed to answering "what is..." sort of questions. So I am sying that there are not three (non-)things, but one which we can call by different names.

    But if we shift to considering form (things, events, patterns), then we can say of each event, etc. that there is consciousness, there is value, and there is intellect. But again, one cannot say of the consciousness (or value, or intellect) what it is in terms of something else, so there is no way to *define* consciousness (or value or intellect) as it shows up in form. We can only use other words that are equally undefinable (e.g., awareness, meaning, reason). But are there three things or one? I say again there is just one. There is not one part of an event that is its value, and another that is its intellect, or a third that is consciousness. So how is it that we have these three words? I don't know. All I know is that I don't know how to distinguish them except by using other words that are just as in need of distinguishing. But it is an interesting thing to think about.

    Bear in mind that I am not saying that this is how things "really are". This is a vocabulary that I have found provisionally useful for making sense of what certain mystics and others have said, in conjunction with my own thinking about consciousness, intellect, and value. (And also, I don't say that there are just three such names -- one might add Will to the list, for example, and others).

    - Scott

    MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
    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 2.1.5 : Wed Feb 09 2005 - 19:12:55 GMT