From: ian glendinning (psybertron@gmail.com)
Date: Thu Apr 21 2005 - 06:41:28 BST
Hi Ham,
I think l see where you're going, but I'm not sure I want to go there,
yet. (I can't see how my view of "essence" is related to your pimary
"cause" .... but lets not go there yet). Too many other open threads
at the moment.
I think my "avoidance" of primary cause, is very close to the debate
three years ago, I had with "bootstrapping", and my non-belief in
meta-physics - ie physics is all there is (don't quote me). I happen
to believe we can never "know" what lies beyond the very edge of what
we can reasoanbly explain at any given time. We can only ever work
from the knowm edge - we may postulate what is in the hole, but we can
never know it in any reasonable explanatory sense without approaching
it from a known edge.
Consequently the metaphysical immovable peg (primary cause) in the
centre of the hole, on which hangs the whole of life, the universe and
everything, is only ever a subject for philosphers on the 19th hole.
No relevance to the game of life itself. As a pragmatist I avoid
losing too much sleep over it.
Sorry to cop out again.
Ian
On 4/21/05, hampday@earthlink.net <hampday@earthlink.net> wrote:
> Ian --
>
> I suspect my last post crossed in the mail with yours. So your comments are
> actually a reply to my earlier note of 4/19.
>
> > I too believe in a concept of "essence", ontologically, but given the
> > rest of the debate going on it's highly unlikely we mean the same
> > thing.
>
> Hold on, young man! Let's not jump to conclusions -- and forget about
> previous debates.
>
> You say you believe in an essence ontology. Would you describe that essence
> as something like matter, something like consciousness, or something in
> common with both? If you believe in a single essence, it would have to have
> a commonality with the everything it was 'essential to', would it not? So,
> already you have found yourself in my camp.
>
> > A couple of your phrases beg questions
> > "the refusual to accept a primary source ..."
> >
> > I don't believe in a metaphysical primary source, so I can't see where
> > to take this, not in this thread anyway.
>
> Okay, you don't like the expression "primary source'. But bear with me.
>
> If you believe that everything in the physical world has a common essence
> beyond appearances, isn't this essence the "metaphysical source" by
> definition? And if Essence is the metaphysical source of things
> [phenomena], it must also be the cause of phenomena, as well. Is there any
> reason to presuppose a prior cause? If not, then your Essence is the
> 'primary source' -- also by definition.
>
> So, where do you see a contradiction in our basic ontologies? You may not
> agree with all the details of my ontological presentation but, remember,
> it's not a doctrine. It's just a presentation -- a hypothesis --
> constructed, like all metaphysical concepts, from the bricks of intuitive
> understanding held together by the mortar of logic and reason.
>
> I've said this before, but it bears repeating: Words and terms mean nothing
> if they don't convey the author's concept. Try to ignore the fact that you
> don't like certain expressions used to postulate a theory. Focus on the
> substance rather than the words. If the conclusion rings true, then the
> theory has meaning to you.
>
> > Sorry,
> > Ian
>
> Apologies not accepted. I remain open for further discussion. How about a
> new thread called: "Is a primary cause necessary?"
>
> 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 : Thu Apr 21 2005 - 06:45:08 BST