Re: MD Burden of Proof

From: Joe (jhmau@sbcglobal.net)
Date: Fri Apr 04 2003 - 22:39:21 BST

  • Next message: Platt Holden: "Re: MD Philosophy and Theology"

    Hey Platt:

    On 04 April 2003 at 6:24 Platt writes:
    In other words, pure awareness prior to any
    pattern whatsoever what is I mean by "field of awareness" <snip>

    joe: I change! Do I only change only my patterns? Is my awareness changed
    by the activity of my instincts? Do I grow my own soul? Does my awareness
    change when I become fatter? When Armstong walked on the moon, was his
    awareness from that pure awareness prior to any pattern? When I speak of
    awareness as a pattern I feel awkward. My DNA generates my awareness. I am
    dynamic only to me. Let the sun generate its own awareness with its gravity
    and nuclear fusion if it wants to!

    Platt continues:
     just as in quantum physics there's a field of potential prior to any trace
    of activity or change.

    joe: In "Physics" Aristotle, according to Aquinas, proposed that everything
    is composed of prime matter and substantial form. Motion was 'actus entis
    in potentia quantum in potentia'. I find a 'field of potential' echoes that
    definition which was based on abstraction.

    I do not see the pattern for a field of awareness as analogous to the
    pattern for a 'field of potential' but analogous to the pattern for a 'field
    of gravity'. My DNA enables my reflections. Frank Herbert's insight in
    "Destination Void" that to be aware I must have threshold control for a
    filter to experience. If I do not have threshold control my awareness will
    be overwhelmed by the content of 'now'. This seems reasonable. It makes
    sense to me in the same way that 'a baby learns' makes sense to me. I want
    my awareness to be my own.

    Can dq be perceived outside sq? Can dq be perceived outside awareness? I
    don't know what I do! Awareness and dq seem to be separate. What is the
    difference between 'reason' and 'logic'? Is there a proper was to propose
    an argument, or are we left to our own devices?

    Platt says:
    Your three aspects of DQ reminds me of William James' four aspects of a
    "fact:"

    "A conscious field

     plus its object as felt or thought of

    plus an attitude towards the object

    plus the sense of a self to who the attitude belongs

    --such a concrete bit of personal experience may be a small bit, but it is a
    solid bit as long as it lasts; not hollow, not a mere abstract element of
    experience such as the "object" is when taken alone. It is a full fact of
    the kind to which all realities whatsoever must belong."

    joe: Williams James is good company! I wonder if he ever had any plumbing
    problems?

    Joe

    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 Apr 04 2003 - 22:37:06 BST