From: Scott Roberts (jse885@localnet.com)
Date: Fri Nov 04 2005 - 22:14:12 GMT
David M,
DM said:
Is there a danger that if we place feelings on the static and objectifiable
side we may be accused of just being nihilists? Does this undermine
values? Does itmean that we we cometo make choices from what is
possible we have no basis to choose one possibility over another?
Scott:
I'm afraid I don't follow. Why should objectifying feelings be nihilistic?
I would say it doesn't undermine values. It replaces emotional values
arising from social/biological acts with emotional values arising from
intellectual acts The "Aha!" moment is, or at least is accompanied by, an
intellectual feeling.
DM said:
You also see final participation as being individual? But do we not also
expect greater freedom at this more advanced stage? The individual remains
dependent on nature, society, culture, etc to become an individual. Is there
not a need for the fulfilment of democracy for the true posiibilities of the
individual to be realised?
Scott:
My guess is that with final participation one can only speak of "individual"
with the logic of contradictory identity: one cannot say one is an
individual, one cannot say one is not an individual, one cannot say one is
both an individual and not an individual, and one cannot say one is neither
an individual nor not an individual. This is an old problem in mystical
talk.
DM said:
I think we also need to think about the status of the possibiliites that we
are presented with. These evolve. Seems to me that being human is to
be have more possibilities than a rock or a dog. Is there not a sense in
which we are dependent on DQ to provide the possibilities from which we
(as Plato's Demiurge you might say) select the SQ that enters this cosmos?
Scott:
We have more possibilities than a rock or a dog. Do we have more
possibilities than physics or biology as a whole? When I say that intellect
applies at all levels, I do not mean to imply that a rock or a dog is an
intelligent being.
We are dependent on the rest of the cosmos to provide possibilities,
certainly. And we do not contain within ourselves the whole of DQ (whatever
that might mean -- but at a minimum it means that we are not fully
autonomous.) So what I would say is that we have started the process of
"taking in" DQ, that is, as partially autonomous individuals, we are also
partially creative, but also partially determined by outside forces. We get
things selected for us as much if not more than we select.
- Scott
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 : Fri Nov 04 2005 - 23:43:08 GMT