From: Joseph Maurer (jhmau@sbcglobal.net)
Date: Tue Jun 21 2005 - 18:09:45 BST
On Thursday 16 June 2005 10:21 AM Paul asks Scott:
Scott: As to the primacy of consciousness, if you can show the vaguest hint
of how to get consciousness from non-consciousness, or how one can speak of
value without awareness, I will reconsider my position.
Paul: Given past conversations and my general confusion over what is meant
by these terms anyway, may I first ask where you draw the line between
non-consciousness and consciousness because it is not clear to me if you
think there is a line that can be drawn or if you are constructing a straw
man.
Assuming the former, do you mean e.g. human and non-human? Inorganic and
organic? Dare I say it, matter and mind? Awake and asleep?
Also, do you distinguish consciousness from experience?
Regarding the challenge of speaking of value without awareness, are you
saying that awareness exists first and causes value? Are you saying that
they arise together? If so, why is the distinction worth making? Can you
have awareness without value?
Hi Paul and Scott, and all,
An interesting post! All answers IMO!
Damn questions! I realize I am putting in my two cents, and butting in but I
interested in perennial philosophy's asnwerts to these questions. Perennial
philosophy is ordinarily an oral tradition. The latest form has surfaced as
the Work which Maurice Nicoll wrote about in his *Commentaries* .
For every manifestation three forces are necessary. Two forces cancel each
other out, e.g., + -. There has to be a third, neutral force, which upholds
the other two without adding anything. The neutral force is like the middle
of a pendulum swing, defined-undefined. The middle of the swing, the fastest
part is 'defined and undefined'.
I am older! I was born an individual sentient. I am aware of death and I
wonder about evolution. Time passes and I die. What force in this scenario
holds and determines my actions? Life! Life is the neutral force upholding
my actions. From life I am passive to further evolution. I have everything I
need to be alive. The memory from life, how I did it before, determines my
future actions. I lose sight of the evolution that created my sentience. I
become mechanical and fragmented. Memory of life is active, my actions are
passive to evolution. Life is a neutral force. War, evolution, culture are
all part of life. My actions are not connected to my evolution as an
individual sentient.
I am older! I was born an individual sentient. I am aware of death and I
wonder about evolution. I work to understand and participate in my evolution
of consciousness. What force in this scenario holds and determines my
actions? Work! Work is a neutral force upholding my actions of participating
in the evolution of my consciousness. The memory of directed behavior for
the evolution of consciousness determines my actions. Work is only neutral
to evolution of consciousness. This is different from a memory of past
actions from life. If my actions am passive to life memories I become
mechanical and fragmented. If I am and active to work in my actions I can
evolve. I work to become fast enough to see passive and active in a pendulum
swing. Life-memory or work determines my death or evolution.
My actions are passive to life, mechanical, active to evolution, conscious.
Perennial philosophy's answer to Scott's question: non-consciousness is
being passive to life, mechanical. Consciousness is being active to active
to work, evolving. In the middle of the pendulum swing consciousness comes
from non-consciousness in the neutrality of work for evolution of
consciousness.
How one can speak of value without awareness? IMO value is of levels,
awareness is of manifestations. The law of order is different from the law
of manifestation. Active or passive awareness comes from work or life. Value
as order is related to higher or lower levels as active or passive.
Individuals in the same level have equal value. Value determines morality
and crime. Active or passive determines evolution in an individual. Ants and
bees seem to indicate that evolution or lack of, has definite implications
for life.
Perennial philosophy's answers to Paul's questions: Non-consciousness and
consciousness see above.
Human and non-human? Applied to an individual sentient's manifestations of
action. Active- conscious is human and passive-mechanical non-human.
Inorganic and organic? This is an order of levels of evolution. As in
organic and social, and social and intellectual. Levels are determined by a
law of order. IMO Within the intellectual level evolution can occur at the
sentient level if work for evolution rather than life is neutral.
Matter and mind? IMO this seems to be a matter of levels of memory. An
individual sentient can be passive-mechanical in life or active-conscious
evolving his being by work. Mind seems to be a memory of active-conscious
origins for behavior, matter a memory a mechanical-life origins for
behavior.
Awake and asleep? When applied to sentient activity awake or asleep is a
state of being. By analogy when an individual sentient participates
mechanically in life actions like war he is asleep. When an individual
sentient participates actively in his own evolution he is awake or
conscious.
Do you distinguish consciousness from experience? IMO Experience can be
active or passive. Consciousness is active.
Joe
>
> Scott: As to the primacy of consciousness, if you can show the vaguest
> hint
> of how to get consciousness from non-consciousness, or how one can speak
> of
> value without awareness, I will reconsider my position.
>
> Paul: Given past conversations and my general confusion over what is
> meant
> by these terms anyway, may I first ask where you draw the line between
> non-consciousness and consciousness because it is not clear to me if you
> think there is a line that can be drawn or if you are constructing a straw
> man.
>
> Assuming the former, do you mean e.g. human and non-human? Inorganic and
> organic? Dare I say it, matter and mind? Awake and asleep?
>
> Also, do you distinguish consciousness from experience?
>
> Regarding the challenge of speaking of value without awareness, are you
> saying that awareness exists first and causes value? Are you saying that
> they arise together? If so, why is the distinction worth making? Can you
> have awareness without value?
>
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 21 2005 - 18:12:45 BST