Re: MD Consciousness/MOQ, definition of

From: ian glendinning (psybertron@gmail.com)
Date: Wed Sep 07 2005 - 09:27:37 BST

  • Next message: Platt Holden: "Re: MD How do conservative values support DQ and the evolution of SQ?"

    Hi Reiner,

    I too had no plan to start with physics, but every time I look for a
    basic explanation of how something came to be I find physics keeps
    turning up as the most natural science.

    On your specific points
    My naive (working) view is.

    The only reality "we can ever know" definitely exists in / is created
    by "our consciousness". Kant I guess.
    (Pragmatism would then say that's the only reality you need worry about.)

    "Created by" is an easy high level holistic kind of thing to say - in
    practice you still need an explantory world model of how it all works,
    how things come to be, and what causes what. For me that model is MoQ
    backed by (a wide and highly non-material) physics.

    That doesn't mean that there isn't a reality out there independent of
    our consciousness, but I just wouldn't lose any sleep over it. It's
    for the birds. As soon as some metaphysicist thinks about it, it's in
    our consciousness again.

    Ian

    On 9/6/05, platootje@netscape.net <platootje@netscape.net> wrote:
    > Ian,
    >
    > >Reiner,
    > >Quarks don't think. Believe me :-)
    > Yep, it's hard finding the right words, that's why I put them in quotes.
    >
    > >Let go the ancient materialist view of atomism.
    > >Physics (or Nature or Quality) is much more awesome than that.
    >
    > I completely agree, however I'm not trying to do physics here, I'll start with philosophy and worrie about the physics later :-)
    >
    > >The smallest atoms are information - as in the smallest change or
    > >distinction that "matters" - ie makes a significant difference in the
    > >MoQ.
    >
    > A lot has to do with semantics... real question remains:
    > is this reality created by consiousness/thoughs or
    > are thoughts/consiousness created by this reality consisting of matter/quality.
    >
    > The first, I'm trying to defend
    > The second is the view that through evolution the human body has formed which is capable of producing thoughts and developing awareness.
    >
    > While the second may be through in the sence that evolution has led to a human body, consiousness has always been there (or at least, since the big bang it's been some sort of consiousness).
    >
    > Best 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
    >
    >

    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 : Wed Sep 07 2005 - 11:20:27 BST