Re: MD Intellect as Consciousness

From: platootje@netscape.net
Date: Tue Jul 26 2005 - 09:10:11 BST

  • Next message: Platt Holden: "Re: MD Intellect as Consciousness"

    Ham wrote:

    >As you will learn from the philosophologers, one of the biggest challenges
    >Philosophy has historically faced is: how to reduce Cartesian Duality to a
    >monism. (I've covered this in the introduction of my thesis.) Pirsig
    >thinks he's
    >achieved this by basing all things experienced on a common esthetic
    >attribute -- Quality.

    I would like to start with the duality introduced by Aristolian Logic:
    If X is true then not-X is false.
    I know I can argue my way into a monism from there, so that's what you may expect from me.

    >In other words, no pain exists from sitting
    >on a hot stove in the absence of either the stove or the sitter. No
    >knowledge of reality -- physical or otherwise -- exists without a cognizant
    >experencing subject. There's your "duality", Reinier.

    No, that's not 'my' duality.

    >I have posited Essence as Ultimate Reality. Essence is not Being nor an
    >existential attribute of a differentiated subject or object. It is the
    >fundamental nature of all phenomena, including thoughts, feelings, and
    >experiences. It is the "not-other" from which all otherness is derived.
    >There are no attributes accessible to the finite mind that we can assign to
    >Essence, except for its absolute Oneness.

    And that's so close to what I have in mind, I still wonder if our differences are mere semantic, or if there is something fundamental.....

    >It's clear to me that this concept is untenable to the MoQ loyalists who
    >feel that by parsing all experienced phenomena into patterns, levels, and
    >latching points of Quality they've solved the riddle. What they've actually
    >done is constructed a "semiotic" reality with no more meaning or insight
    >than the dualism professed by Descartes, and far less substance.
    >
    >So, roll up your sleeves, Reinier and give it your best. Hopefully, what
    >you come up with will be have a more logical foundation than the esthetic
    >semiosis proposed by the MoQ.
    >
    Thanks for the encouragement. Although I see it as a advantage that I'm not burdened by a lot of philosophology, this may be a disadvantage in getting my ideas across. The simple and the obvious get overlooked easily.

    Kind regards,
    Reinier.

    __________________________________________________________________
    Switch to Netscape Internet Service.
    As low as $9.95 a month -- Sign up today at http://isp.netscape.com/register

    Netscape. Just the Net You Need.

    New! Netscape Toolbar for Internet Explorer
    Search from anywhere on the Web and block those annoying pop-ups.
    Download now at http://channels.netscape.com/ns/search/install.jsp

    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 Jul 26 2005 - 11:14:35 BST