Jason Gaedtke (jgaedtke@scitele.com)
Sat, 6 Sep 1997 04:09:04 +0100
Bodvar:
For Jason: Do you see the implications for the Quantum/Zohar/E-B
Condensate
issue? The processes in the biological "medium" surely has something to
say
for the organism's "quality" experience, and guaranteed for humankind's
giant quality step, but the consciousness problem of the SOM vanishes.
Yes, I think I understand what you are saying here, but some further
elaboration on your views regarding the E-B Condensate relevance would
be
helpful. It seems, after reading your response to Platt's intriguing
question, that we are both describing the same concepts -- only from
different perspectives. Perhaps you could share your views regarding
this
"resolution" of the so-called "problem of consciousness" as it relates
to
artificial sentient beings. Do you believe that a "machine" could be
created which would have the same conscious experiences that we enjoy as
humans?
Looking forward to your response... or any others that may be offered
here.
Jason
-----Original Message-----
From: Bodvar Skutvik [SMTP:skutvik@online.no]
Sent: Friday, September 05, 1997 3:53 AM
To: Multiple recipients of
Subject: LS Atom's experience and Quantum 's
May I try to answer both Platt and Jason in this message? They have
different approaches, but deep down it concerns the same infernal mind
vs
matter problem. Besides it gives me a chance to continue where I left
off
in my Zohar review: how the Value Metaphysics resolves the
subject/object
riddles - among them the sentient vs insentient one that Platt raises
and
- hopefully - the ongoing quantum consciousness debate.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
-----------
Platt Holden wrote:
The problem is: How could Inorganic static patterns be created unless
inorganic entities like atoms were able to experience?
If atoms don't experience, at what level did experience arise? And, how
could experience arise from a lower level of no experience?
This seems to be a subject-object platypus. Is there an MOQ solution?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
--------------
Platt's "experience" term indicates a sentient capacity, possibly even
consciousness or awareness, at least the ability to think or learn,
isn't
it so? To come to grips with this requires a step back to "square one"
of
the MOQ. Its first postulate is that the great divide between subject
and
object is shifted over to between dynamic and static value (the still
more
basic assertion that everything is value is just as true or untrue as
the
mind and matter presuppositions. At this level Godels Theorem hits all
who
comes down from mountains with stone tablets).
Once this metaphysical rearrangement is done all the countless
subject/object dualities: mind/matter, psychic/physic (see chapter 7 of
Danah Zohar's "The Quantum Self" for additional dualities) lose their
absoluteness, merge, becomes relative (re my up/down analogue); mind is
everything and nothing in a MOQ sense: experience becomes the world. A
human's mind is humankind's world, a frog's experience is a frog's
world,
and - with my tongue in cheek - an atom's (or any other particle's)
experience is the world of inorganic patterns.
The frog reality is simple (but complete - no foggy version of man's as
the
SOM indicates), it is only the Inorganic and the Organic values, while
mankind's reality is the most baffling aggregate ever assembled: it
contains the said realities plus the Social and the immensely complex
Intellectual one which include heaven and earth, language, music, art...
(ZMM page 244), but in no way are we "aware" in the "objective" God's
eye
sense that the subject/object notion of "being able to think" suggests
(see
footnote). Subjectivity as well as objectivity has become subsets under
the
grand MOQ overview. It is a Copernican revolution where (as P of ZMM
says):
the centre shifts, subjects and objects become planets that circle the
sun
of Quality instead of their former role as reality itself. Nothing
changes,
yet everything changes.
Footnote: The SOM phrase "ability to think" means in MOQ lingo: "the
ability to manipulate static intellectual values - language,
mathematics
etc. This is no longer the subject/object ghostlike "abstractions in the
"mind", but as real as real comes ----- intellectually seen - and
resolves
the nihilistic trap of SOM where it can be easily proved that there is
no
reality outside ourselves. Only humankind has entered the Intellectual
level, but perhaps other primates are in the fringe zone.
This was intended to answer your first point Platt? Inorganic static
entities (patterns or particles) ARE the Inorganic static experience,
just
as we humans are all subsequent levels of the quality experience. In a
SOM
context this sound like mysticism, but it is the realty that naturally
unfolds itself seen from the MOQ platform. The second question of how
experience could arise from no experience - or how mind could emerge
from
matter is, as you suggest, the biggest platypus ever to have roamed the
subject/object world. The above gives the MOQ solution, but I am at your
disposal for another round if useful. Your own knowledge of Pirsig's
work
and the more pragmatic application of his ideas surpasses mine I admit.
For Jason: Do you see the implications for the Quantum/Zohar/E-B
Condensate
issue? The processes in the biological "medium" surely has something to
say
for the organism's "quality" experience, and guaranteed for humankind's
giant quality step, but the consciousness problem of the SOM vanishes
Bodvar (Bo) Skutvik
-- post message - mailto:skwok@spark.net.hk unsubscribe/queries - mailto:lilasquad@geocities.com homepage - http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/4670
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu May 13 1999 - 16:41:55 CEST