Re: MD Primary Reality

From: hampday@earthlink.net
Date: Thu Apr 28 2005 - 01:40:51 BST

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

    Arlo, Platt, Ian, Sam, MSH, and all --

    Having offered a theory on the reason for the fundamental discord in our MoQ
    discussions (as I see it) under the 'Hume, Paley and Intelligent Design'
    heading, I'd like to open it for discussion by the entire MD list. Hence,
    the new subject line.

    Since an explanation can never be as clear as an actual example, I've copied
    conceptual definitions quoted from two (non-MoQ) sources, each of which
    represents a distinct reality perspective. You will recognize the first as
    'Scientific Materialism' and may consider the second either a form of
    'Platonic Idealism' or 'Anthropocentrism'. How would you classify it?

    My main question is: Which reality perspective are you more likely to
    identify with? That is, which statement best expresses your personal belief
    system? I hope you will find this exercise self-revealing as well as
    interesting; for me, your answer will indicate whether my theory has any
    bearing on the way metaphysically-related topics are typically dealt with by
    the various MD participants. In other words, it should answer the question:
    "Where is he (she) coming from?" -- often an important factor to consider
    when directing thoughts and ideas to specific individuals.

    Again, this is not a trick question, and I'm not trying to "challenge"
    anyone. I'd really like to know on which side you would position yourself.
    Also, I'd be interested in whether you consider this a useful 'qualifier'
    for reviewing and posting messages in this forum.

    Statement A.

    "Ontologically, [its] materialism means that matter, nature, the observable
    world is taken 'without reservations' as real in its own right, neither
    deriving its reality from any supernatural or transcendental source, nor
    dependent for its existence on the mind of man. It is considered
    scientifically evident that matter is prior to mind both temporally and
    logically in the sense that mind never appears except as an outgrowth of
    matter, and must be explained accordingly. Space and time are viewed as
    forms of the existence of matter." [Dagobert Runes, philosopologist]

    Statement B.

    "I believe that consciousness and its contents are all that exists. ...The
    world of our daily experience-the world of tables, chairs, stars and people,
    with their attendant shapes, smells, feels and sounds-is a species-specific
    user interface to a realm far more complex, a realm whose essential
    character is conscious. ... If this be right, if consciousness is
    fundamental, then we should not be surprised that, despite centuries of
    effort by the most brilliant minds, there is as yet no physical theory of
    consciousness, no theory that explains how mindless matter and energy or
    fields could be, or cause, conscious experience." [Donald Hoffman,
    cognitive scientist]

    Oh, one additional question. Do you feel that a third statement would be
    required to adequately represent the major reality perspectives of the MD
    group?

    Thanks for participating,
    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 : Thu Apr 28 2005 - 01:47:24 BST