From: Nathan Pila (pila@sympatico.ca)
Date: Sun Nov 09 2003 - 21:40:24 GMT
Hi David,
Sound does not necessarily product hearing. Right? Consider a deaf person
whose eardrum does not vibrate to the beat of the sound. The sound is there
but he hears nothing.
Also, hearing can be done without listening. I am sitting here and not
listening to the television in the other room yet I hear it.
I guess the question I'm getting at is what you think of the fact that our
brains are wired so that some inputs are meaningful while others are not.
Is it not an accident of incredible luck that evolution gave us an
instrument that is useful for asking questions and pondering the meaning of
life?
Nathan
----- Original Message -----
From: "David MOREY" <us@divadeus.freeserve.co.uk>
To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
Sent: Sunday, November 09, 2003 9:46 AM
Subject: Re: MD string theory
> Hi
>
> Sound means hearing, hearing means a listening being.
> You've got to separate what is all too human from what
> occurs outside of conscious experience. & then 'outside of conscious
> experience'
> what meaning can that have?
>
> regards
> David M
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Nathan Pila" <pila@sympatico.ca>
> To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
> Sent: Sunday, November 09, 2003 1:16 AM
> Subject: MD string theory
>
>
> > Gert-Jan Peeters,
> >
> > Hmm, So, if there is no one in the forest, then the tree makes no sound
as
> > it falls, right?
> >
> > Did you happen to catch the latest NOVA on PBS? It was about the book
> called
> > The Elegant Universe. The book discusses 'string theory'. String theory
> > postulates that all matter and all radiation (photons, heat etc) is
> composed
> > of vibrating strings of energy. That, these strings, are the ultimate
> > reality; the strings vibrate in 11 dimensions. Since we can't imagine 11
> > dimensions, is it fair to say that only 4 dimensions exist and the
strings
> > are unreal?
> >
> > on the television And in
> > personal
> > > life has increased. Others have found the MoQ to be very usefull. So,
> the
> > > world didn't change, but our explination did. And the best explination
> > wich
> > > gives us the least doubts starts with the assumption that experience
is
> > > reality. And without that experience there would be no reality.
> > >
> > > Your question: "If humans and all other beings that have consciousness
> > were
> > > to disappear, would apples stop falling?" I don't know. But if you
would
> > say
> > > that apples would still be falling, your saying more than that. And it
> > takes
> > > you down again to where you'll end up with all the contradictions. To
> > avoid
> > > those contradictions people use the Moq and the MoQ would give another
> > > explanation: If consciousness has disappeared I can never be sure if
> > apples
> > > fall. It falls outside my experience, so it falls outside reality.
> > > Experience is reality. No experience = no reality. No apples, no
> gravity,
> > > no ground to fall on...
> > >
> > > But then again - it's a temporary state of mind until someone finds a
> > better
> > > explination ..
> > >
> > > Gegroet,
> > >
> > > > 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
>
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 : Sun Nov 09 2003 - 21:41:01 GMT