LS Re: DQ as flux: The Pre-Socratics?


Platt Holden (pholden@worldnet.att.net)
Sun, 5 Oct 1997 17:52:15 +0100


After some snipping, Platt said:

> > Good point. Perhaps this is similar to the question of how does math
> relate
> > to natural phenomenon? Do we impose mathematical patterns on the world
or
> > are the patterns built in like Plato's ideals, awaiting discovery? Is
> the
> > essence of light dependent in some way on quantum mathematics? I vote
no.
> > But there are many far wiser than me who say yes.
>
> I suspect that the answer lies "in Between", as it always seems to do.
The
> mathematical patterns that underlie music, light, gravity, etc. are
there.
> We cannot deny the existence of those mathematical patterns, and it
> seems to me that in some way these things are dependent upon them.
> But the essences thereof are surely not strictly part and parcel of those
> mathematical patterns.
>
> I cannot perceive "red" in the absence of light of a certain wavelength
> striking my photoreceptors, but you are certainly right in saying that
the
> fact of that causal relationship does not mean that the relationship
> itself is the essence. Perhaps DQ cannot emerge without a foundation
> based on SQ. Your thoughts?
>
To quote Pirsig (P.11, Subjects, Objects, Data & Values), intellectual
patterns are left behind "in the wake of this cutting edge (DQ)." So DQ
must be independent of and prior to any foundation.

We may be getting into the first cause argument that says each event must
be caused by a prior event, ad infinitum. But, quantum theory suggests time
and space can be fragmented with no arrow of time present. In that context,
to say something happens "prior to" becomes meaningless.

At this point I'm in over my head, so I defer to a quantum expert like
Doug.

> > Well, I can describe how to get an experience, but not the experience
> > itself. For example, I can't describe the smell of a rose, the taste of
> > chocolate or how to ride a bicycle. Can you describe Quality? >
>
> Not in so many words, but I take the act of "pointing to it" to be
> at least partially descriptive. The point is that one cannot "describe"
> Quality except through the act of pointing to it as we are doing. I
> think that we agree on this point, and I have stated things poorly.
> (What a surprise there!!)
>
Yes, we agree. The essence of intellect is a pointing event, so to speak.

  

--
post message - mailto:skwok@spark.net.hk
unsubscribe/queries - mailto:diana@asiantravel.com
homepage - http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/4670



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu May 13 1999 - 16:42:04 CEST