From: Wim Nusselder (wim.nusselder@antenna.nl)
Date: Sat Sep 06 2003 - 22:37:57 BST
Dear Platt,
I wrote:
'the concept "life force" should not be understood as anthropomorphic.
Self-consciousness, knowing one's self, implies the possibility to
deny/avoid/negate one's self and its human forms. Knowing what's human, we
can create concepts and statements that aren't.'
You replied 06 Sep 2003 08:54:37 -0400:
'Isn't your argument based on the S/O division, a concept of self and
not-self?'
Distinguishing self and non-self doesn't require a distinction between
subject and object, let alone a metaphysical one. It is just the distinction
between the patterns of value one identifies with and those one doesn't
identify with.
You wrote also:
'I agree we can gain knowledge that rationality cannot access. How?
Primarily through contemplation.'
Contemplation as I understand it is only a limited extension of rationality.
For me human intuition and emotion (that differ from animal intution and
emotion by employing symbols) are the primary ways to transcend ego-centered
rationality.
You wrote before:
'Purpose of life, it's creation, maintenance, and expansion.'
I didn't recognize it as an answer to my question 'Whose purpose?', because
I understood 'creation, maintenance and expansion' as purposes given TO
life, not BY life.
By repeating 6 Sep. 'Life's purpose.' in reply to my 'Whose purpose?', do
you mean that life doesn't HAVE these purposes but GIVES those purposes??
We were talking about an alternative explanation of evolution for scientific
'oopsism'. You suggested purposeful creation by a 'life force' as
alternative. If we humans grant purposes on behalf of life (being part of
it) or on behalf of that 'life force' (embodying it), as you suggested 6
Sep., that can hardly be an explanation of evolution, can it? That would
imply explaining creation from an activity of one of its creatures.
I agree with equating DQ with such a 'life force', but only as purpose, not
as purpose-giver. DQ and that 'life force' are then purposes without a
subject that grants them.
Patterns of value 'migrate towards DQ'. No-one is guiding them. That's no
'oopsism' in disguise. It's just the 'natural' result of 'patterns' being
only 'patterns' and no 'absolutely enforced laws'.
With friendly greetings,
Wim
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 : Sat Sep 06 2003 - 22:52:47 BST