From: Scott Roberts (jse885@localnet.com)
Date: Fri Mar 18 2005 - 00:31:11 GMT
Ham,
Given that the MOQ rejects both objectivism and subjectivism -- indeed, that
rejection is the starting point of the MOQ -- it seems a little strange that
you should be asking people here where they stand on this essay. But maybe
I'm missing what you are getting at. The MOQ assigns metaphysical primacy to
value, so what the debate is is over what that entails. I'm obviously
arguing that that entails a ubiquitous consciousness, but others may
disagree. Regardless, this argument (in this forum) comes within a context
of value-primacy, not object-primacy or subject-primacy. And, I should point
out, while I argue for a ubiquitous consciousness, that does not mean I
agree with this author's concept of consciousness -- my view is quite
opposed to his alternative to objectivism. Rather, I go with Merrell-Wolff's
consciousness without an object and without a subject.
- Scott
----- Original Message -----
From: <hampday@earthlink.net>
To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2005 1:00 PM
Subject: Re: MD Contradictions
DMB, Scott and all MOQers--
On 3/13, Scott asked:
> Was there consciousness before the biological level came into being?
Dmb answered:
> ...the quotes (now below) answer your question. Yes, there is
consciousness
> before the biological level. The biological level is a construct of the
> intellect, which is generated by a prior experience...
>
> "In the MOQ empirical experience begins with Quality which generates
> intellectual patterns. One of these intellectual patterns is named
'senses,'
> but this pattern is derived from the study of anatomy and is not primary
in
> the actual empirical process."
Now this "patterns & levels" nonsense does not answer Scott's question, and
anyone who thinks otherwise is lost in a wordgame called "Pirsig Says".
Pardon my cynicism, but I've followed these discussions for almost two years
now, and have yet to see a definitive answer to fundamental questions like
this one.
In the interest of clarifying the metaphysical issue being contested here,
may I offer an alternative solution?
I refer all of you to Anton Thorn's website at http://www.geocities.com
(ref: "Metaphysical Primacy"). Regardless of how you view Ayn Rand's
objectivism (or my own "subjectivism"), your reaction to this essay is
critical to the points being raised in this forum, and I for one would be
most interested in what you all say about it. For those who need more
persuasion, the abstract reads as follows:
"The issue of metaphysical primacy is defined and explained, and the
metaphysical primacy of existence is validated. The relationship of the
Objectivist axioms and the primacy of existence to knowledge is
explained. Finally, the reversal of the primacy of existence, which is
the primacy of consciousness, is briefly examined and the basic
performative inconsistency of theism is exposed. The piece concludes with a
simple challenge to theists."
Thorn's clearly-worded essay is well worth the review of anyone interested
in philosophy. And where you side on this fundamental issue will reveal
more about the MOQ belief system and its proponents than any question
answered in "patterns & levels" semantics. Consider it my "challenge" to
you all.
Thanks, folks. I'll be eagerly awaiting your responses.
Essentially yours,
Ham
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
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 : Fri Mar 18 2005 - 00:34:50 GMT