Hi Struan and all,
Struan, I don't know if you deliberately go around making yourself unpopular,
but you have an amazing knack of pissing people off before they even really read
what you write. In the end, I think that very little of what you write
is contentious.
In the end, I find this whole chicken and egg type argument futile, and it's
easy to see its origins:
STRUAN
> Unless
> one departs from logic and rationality, it is impossible to postulate an
experience without also,
> and simultaneously, postulating an experiencer.
The whole problem with the discussion about mind is that the "experienced"
(object), the "experiencer" (subject) and the "postulator" are all one and the
same.
Further, your statement looks to be an oxymoron - how can you "postulate"
anything without logic and rationality?
(Unless you have some special new meaning for the word postulate).
Now I've said that, I'd like to restate what I believe to be the real issue:
How "objectively" do you delineate between the experiencer and the experienced?
Jonathan
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