From: platootje@netscape.net
Date: Thu Sep 15 2005 - 07:52:44 BST
Hi Ham and Jos:
Being new to this thread pls allow me to first give a reaction to this post, and I will try to read more of both your opinions and hopefully have a contribution.
>The physical world is not only diverse and differentiated, but its
>differentiation in many respects constitutes a polarized system.
The differentiation and polarization are very much linked I think. Differentiation is usefull for sake of discussion when polarization is not obvious (short, long, somewhere in between...) In fact I think for the discussion, this polarization is all we need. BTW, this is the TAO.
We observe
>this polarity in the protons and electrons of the micro-world of nuclear
>physics, as well as in antithetical attributes -- being/nothingness,
>birth/death, etc. -- in the macro-world of nature. Experienced values are
>virtually a study in contrasts -- pleasure/pain, good/evil, beauty/ugliness,
>peace/violence, desire/disgust, harmony/dissonance, order/chaos, etc.
>Indeed, this "law of opposition" is so prevalent that one can almost regard
>existential experience as "contrariety personified".
I'm all with you
>At the other extreme, the primary source (whether identified as the
>Absolute, God, or The One) has historically been regarded as a unified,
>undifferentiated Whole. If we assume this to be true, then it follows that
>the absolute source is the antithesis of polarized multiformity. In other
>words, Essence [DQ] is that state or mode of reality in which there is no
>opposition and polarity disappears. I submit that Essence has logical
>validity as the 'non-contradictory first principle'.
Yes!
> Existence [SQ] = positive vs. negative = contrariety
> Essence [DQ] = positive=negative = unity
I think this is correct, albeit difficult to accept anything to the right of the 'equal-sign' when speeking of essence
>If you see any value to this approach, perhaps you might want to incorporate
>it some way in your "collage". On the other hand, if your your intutive
>light doesn't flash, we can proceed to the "heirarchical" points under
>discussion. I intend to address those in a follow-up post.
My 'intuitive lights' are flashing!
This is what I mean by saying duality includes a monisme (as opposite to itself) but a monisme does not include a duality. (I have never litterally said this, but tried to say it)
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 : Thu Sep 15 2005 - 08:29:24 BST