Re: MD Access to Quality

From: hampday@earthlink.net
Date: Fri Apr 22 2005 - 01:55:10 BST

  • Next message: Mark Steven Heyman: "Re: MD Access to Quality"

    Hello Steve:

    > I've resisted staying out of everyone's way this long, but temptation has
    > gotten the better of me.
    >
    > Ham, I fail to see why another fundamental something, such as your
    essence,
    > is necessary as the foundation from which Quality arises. Quality (not
    DQ,
    > which I have issue with as part of an articulated metaphysics) is just a
    > label. We could use anything (the Tao, nothingness, etc, etc).

    My point, exactly. It's just another label without metaphysical foundation.
    Quality is simply a value judgment applied to something experienced.
    Whether you consider it "pre-intellectual" or not, it cannot be considered
    causal in an ontological sense, nor does it resolve the duality problem of
    metaphysics.

    The physical principle of causality states that every action has a cause.
    Even the Big Bang had a prior cause. Hence, attributes of things, such as
    Quality, Beauty and Value, cannot be primary causes any more than can the
    things to which they refer.

    > Speaking for myself, there is no
    > conflict between Quality, experience, or empirical. What does come out of
    > this is no room and no necessity for the transcendental or supernatural.
    > But the essence of spirituality remains, the concept of Wholeness and
    > interconnectedness of everything. This, seems to me, is a more elegant
    and
    > less complicated explanation than introducing something more above,
    > underneath, or beyond.

    The "interconnectedness of everything" is a pantheistic concept that won't
    do for me because I see Essence as a unified Whole. All things taken
    together, whether substantively or experientially, still have the
    differentiated properties of a "thing". Essence is immutable: it is the
    indispensable "uncreated" source of all things that transcends the
    limitations of finitude.

    You don't need a course in Ontology, Steve -- just the willingness to
    consider a new belief system with an essential foundation and a valuistic
    premise. The "hows" and "whys" of Essentialism are too complex to expound
    here, but can be found in my on-line thesis, www.essentialism.net .

    Enjoy,
    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



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Apr 22 2005 - 02:01:35 BST