Hi Struan, Roger and All
So if we substitute Quality Event for experience (as per MoQ) and assume that the
world/reality consists of Quality Events then why is it necessary to bring in experiencers,
except of course for the sake of intellectualising about what the world "really" consists of.
This goes some way to explaining why I made the statement that "We are created by reality
as much as we create it...".
The idea of experience and experiencer is just another way of claiming some sort of
'objective' reality of subject and object in which there is some marked delineation between
the two. If this is the case then what is the relationship between the two and how exactly
does the experiencer do the experiencing if the two are separate.
Horse
On 11 Apr 2000, at 12:05, Struan Hellier wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> ROGER:
> >Will you agree that James states that:
> >
> >1) The world is composed of pure experience?
> >2) That thoughts and things and consiousness are made of experience?
> >3) That the sole postulate of radical empiricism is experience?
>
> 1) Yes
> 2) Yes
> 3) Yes
>
> >If so, how do you think James would explain what your "presupposed mind" is
> >composed of? (and what do YOU think it is made of?)
>
> 1) I don't know, you would have to ask him. I'm not sure he was concerned with that question.
> 2) X
>
> ROGER:
> >But you need to grant me that an equally valid assumption is that James would
> >define "MIND" as also made of pure experience. If so, all that is
> >presupposed is experience!
>
> The definition of mind is made up of pure experience. I will grant you that very happily.
> That-which-at-some-point-in-the-future-will-be-defined-as-mind (X) is presupposed and, guess what?
> It is prior to experience. Was that not Pirsig's point? He called it, rather pompously, Dynamic
> Quality whereas I see no justification for that term and call it X. Is that not how Pirsig claims to
> have broken free of SOM? He is, I think, wrong, but that is his claim, is it not? Saying that
> experience is prior to experience doesn't logically (a priori) make sense.
>
> ROGER:
> >PS -- And Quality is pure experience.... ie flatness, browness.....
>
> Then I put it to you that, if you are correct, the MoQ presupposes an experiencer (at whatever
> level) in exactly the same way, does it not? Rick tells us it does not, but I don't see how his
> explanation helps:
>
> RICK:
> "The MoQ identifies the "MY PURE
> EXPERIENCE" that Struan tells us James is interested in as temporary Static
> "incarnations" of a Dynamic Monism. Thus the "ME" in "MY PURE EXPERIENCE"
> is really just more of "THE EXPERIENCE"."
>
> What is having, "the experience," I still wonder? The same question pertains.
>
> ROGER:
> >PPPS -- Struan, I want a GET OUT OF JAIL FREE card good toward excusing me
> >from one future accusation of solipsism too ( my last card expired)
>
> Granted - so long as I can have another 'erratum' card. My last one just expired too. Now about
> those babies. When can we start?
>
> Struan
>
> P.S And who is Susan Moore? Apparently she is in Pasadena until tomorrow, sans e-mail. Don't ask me!
> Well, "hello," if you are out there Susan.
> ------------------------------------------
> Struan Hellier
> < mailto:struan@clara.co.uk>
> "All our best activities involve desires which are disciplined and
> purified in the process."
> (Iris Murdoch)
>
>
>
> MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
> Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
> MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
>
> To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
> http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
>
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:00:42 BST