Re: MD Self-consciousness

From: David MOREY (us@divadeus.freeserve.co.uk)
Date: Tue Nov 04 2003 - 20:13:38 GMT

  • Next message: Platt Holden: "Re: MD What makes an idea dangerous?"

    Hi

    Seems important to realise that quantum probabilities
    associated with quantum fields is not an aspect
    of SQ. The absence of pattern & repetition is
    surely an aspect of DQ. I see the more
    from energy to structure and materiality as
    a withdrawal of DQ until you get SQ type
    material bondage. So that life is the re-emergence of
    DQ back in the direction of increased freedom. This is
    suggested by Arthur M Young (see his web site).

    regards
    DM

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Paul Turner" < >
    To: < >
    Sent: Monday, November 03, 2003 5:36 PM
    Subject: RE: MD Self-consciousness

    > Hi Scott
    >
    > > [Paul:]
    > > I'm not sure I agree that metaphysics requires us to leave behind
    > > everyday affairs; I think the MOQ tries to ground metaphysics back in
    > > [static and Dynamic] everyday experience whilst providing a rational
    > > framework in which to incorporate more exceptional [Dynamic]
    > experience,
    > > such as mystic understanding. As such, I think it is important to
    > > distinguish between the types of intellect/mind we are discussing and
    > I
    > > think the MOQ is right to use the static/Dynamic distinction as its
    > > primary division to point towards non-verbal, immediately apprehended
    > > awareness and not have it become pinned down with limiting
    > definitions.
    > > I also think it is right to limit a static definition of intellect and
    >
    > > mind - one of my biggest problems with the many different schools of
    > > Buddhism is the varying and confusing use of "mind" [or at least in
    > > western translations of Buddhism].
    >
    > [Scott:]
    > Once one has realized that consciousness operates outside of the
    > spatio-temporal framework, it seems to me foolish in the extreme to
    > ground metaphysics in everyday experience.
    >
    > [Paul:]
    > I did not mean that everyday experience is all there is but equally, I
    > think everyday experience is all too easily overlooked in metaphysics.
    > As said above, the MOQ uses a static/Dynamic division to try and explain
    > everyday (static and Dynamic) experience whilst providing a framework to
    > incorporate exceptional (Dynamic) experience such as mysticism.
    >
    > With regards to consciousness, as said before, as time and space are
    > described as a (highly valuable) product of consciousness
    > (question-beggingly defined here as intellectual patterns) there is no
    > requirement for the MOQ to explain consciousness in terms of a
    > spatio-temporal framework. Consciousness is nevertheless an everyday
    > experience of value patterns verifiable by anyone.
    >
    > [Scott:]
    > Similarly if one accepts quantum reality, and/or mysticism.
    >
    > [Paul:]
    > Quantum reality in the MOQ resides at the static inorganic level as
    > patterns of subatomic preferences. Whilst the movement of subatomic
    > particles is not part of everyday empirical experience, as the MOQ
    > levels are not continuous, there is no requirement to ground the other
    > (more readily experienced) levels of the metaphysical system in quantum
    > reality.
    >
    > You have a point about mysticism. The MOQ holds that static patterns of
    > value do not advance a mystic understanding, which is described as an
    > experience of unpatterned value. However, whilst I agree that a mystic
    > understanding often denies the validity of everyday experience, a
    > metaphysics that only acknowledges Dynamic, ineffable, conceptually
    > unknown reality, is a blank piece of paper. I have a feeling your
    > adoption of the L of CI offers a solution to this?
    >
    > Finally, I don't think it is extremely foolish for metaphysics to
    > account for everyday experience which does not involve quantum
    > fluctuation and mystic awareness. Everyday experience includes sights,
    > sounds, smells, feelings, relationships, bonds, duties, customs,
    > problems, ideas, principles, decisions, analysis and philosophy
    > discussion groups. This is all part of the comprehensible static
    > universe which the MOQ provides a vocabulary to talk about whilst
    > maintaining that all of this arises from a Dynamic reality that is
    > always more than what is said about it.
    >
    > What would a metaphysics based on the L of CI look like?
    >
    > Regards
    >
    > Paul
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > 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 -
    >
    > To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
    > http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
    >
    >

    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 -

    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 : Tue Nov 04 2003 - 20:24:08 GMT