From: hampday@earthlink.net
Date: Tue Jun 14 2005 - 16:30:47 BST
Paul (and all others with a different take on Reality) --
You said:
> Self-awareness is one of those slippery terms, particularly within a
> philosophical inquiry, that can waste a lot of discussion time if not
> carefully defined. May I ask you to elaborate on your use of the term
here?
My point exactly. So why are you all wasting so much time and effort trying
to place Intellect, Consciousness, Subjectivity, and Mind into some sort of
SQ scheme?
If you could get beyond the "slippery terms" for a moment, and turn on your
imagination, you'll find that you can "conceptualize" what these terms
really represent. After all, Philosophy is more than linguistic
propositions; it's an attempt to conceptualize what we call Reality.
Consider the fact that everything you know, every idea you have, every
feeling you experience is proprietary to yourself. If there were no one
else "out there", you would still have this awareness. It is the
"essential" You. If that You disappeared, there would be no Reality. Are
you still with me?
Now, you say, that's pure solipsism. Okay, but it's the starting point for
defining Reality. You can't go outside yourself and say, oh, but there's
evidence of a reality beyond myself. What is the evidence? Well, we
"know"... you see, it doesn't work; we're back to the starting point. All
knowledge is proprietary. All reality is contingent upon one's awareness of
it.
So, we're faced with the fact that there is some kind of "universality" to
this awareness that allows my worldview to align with yours. Hence, the
significance of of Jung/Chardin's "collective conscience". I don't
subscribe to that notion.
I attribute universality to a Primary Source -- Essence. This Source is
absolute and undifferentiated, the very antithesis of nothingness. But,
because it's also "perfect", Essence has the capacity to "look at itself"
through the eyes of an autonomous observer. This capacity is the "dynamic"
or "negational" mode of Essence which creates the individuated self, the
"I-am-aware" that provides this autonomous perspective. You and I are
finite agencies capable of sensing only the Value of Essence in an objective
world of "otherness" which has been separated from the sensibility that you
and I bring to it. Value is our link to reality; it is the only thing we
"take with us" because it is the only thing that transcends finite
existence.
There's my hypothesis expressed in the simplest terms I'm capable of at the
moment. Now of course you can substitute Intellect and Quality, and insert
whatever patterns or levels you feel necessary, to conform with your
interpretation of the MoQ. But the basic concept is founded on the
immutability of Essence and the proprietary nature of awareness. As a
beloved character on the BBC series "Are You Being Served?" was in the habit
of saying, I am "unanimous" on the truth of this concept.
I see no need to comment on the remainder of your last post, as it simply
challenges the Primary Reality that I've just described.
Thanks for another opportunity to explain Essentialism.
Regards,
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 : Tue Jun 14 2005 - 16:55:21 BST