From: platootje@netscape.net
Date: Thu Sep 29 2005 - 12:03:44 BST
Hello David:
>Maybe physical was a bad word, but it still fits best I guess. I mean
>that these things I called physical can be explained by a chain of
>cause and effect. Except for your "picking up of thoughts", which is
>not explicable by cause and effect chains. You either believe in it
>or you don't, but nobody has found any prove that there are thoughts
>out there waiting to be picked up (as far as I'm aware).
Well, applying your own cause and effect reasoning, can you have a thought that has no cause? If you answer no then thoughts are subject to cause and effect, if you answer yes then there is free will and the world is not deterministic.
>As far as I'm concerned physics are based on quantum-physics. Quantum-
>physics explains more than physics does, because physics is a subset
>of quantum-physics.
I would rather say that quantum-physiscs is a subset of physics.
Which doesn't mean that the laws of physic are
>invalid, they're just not universal enough to explain everything.
Some apply with large masses and large velocity (relativity) some apply at very microscopic level (quatum-physics).
>[Reinier earlier]
>>>> Think about it.... you can because the stuff your brains made up
>>>> off is able to sense the stuff that thougts are made up off. We're
>>>> a kind of radio and we can pick up different frequencies, depending
>>>> on which sense we use.
>
>[me]
>>> For that we'd have to believe that there's
>>> something like "consciousness" or "thoughts" floating around which we
>>> are able to pick up through some non-explicable process.
>
>[Reinier again]
>> No, thoughts are the result of experience or valueing, like every
>> else is.
>
>Err... is there a contradiction in what you're saying or am I just
>not getting this right? Either we pick up thoughts that are already
>there, as you said earlier, or thoughts are created through the
>process of experiencing. Which one is it?
I admit my mistake, I did not do a good job explaining what I meant. The brain intellectualizes thoughts. It can certainly alter thoughts and thus produce new ones on an intellectual level.
To apply it to the MoQ, a thought is an intellectual static pattern coming from DQ. Since it is the brain that 'works' with it, we call it a thought and it becomes part of the intellectual level.
At the same time there is DQ that gets 'valued' on other levels and thus becomes part of the social, organic or inorganic level. It all comes from the same 'source', DQ, but the level on which it gets valued, creates the mental picture of it (This is the intellectual S/O division).
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 29 2005 - 12:09:34 BST