Erin,
enoonan wrote:
> SCOTT: In the case of resonance, it has appeal
> because it is something that, on the one hand, is a concentrated locus
> of activity, yet on the other, we can grasp it as an object. But it is
> precisely this paradoxical ability that is the hallmark of
> consciousness. As I've said before, the mystery of awareness is that to
> be aware of the passage of time (as we must be to notice the continuity
> of a resonance), requires a non-temporal stance, which no
> spatio-temporal activity can account for.
>
>
> ERIN:
> I want to bring this up again because I am still
> interested in the effect of expectations and how it relates to the
> consciousness.For some reason it seems static quality could replace resonance
> in these statements. If it could then does the MOQ have a non-temporal stance?
Not that I have seen, which is something that I think the MoQ needs to
address. That is, Pirsig doesn't say much of anything, that I can
recall, about the nature of consciousness (how it works).
My point above is that, since in our experience patterns occur over
time, yet we can say "there is a pattern", then we must, unconsciously,
be outside of time. This is really just another way of pointing to the
basic unsolved mystery of philosophy: the one and the many (the same
argument goes for seeing extension in space). All mind-brain identity
hypothesis-based theories of consicousness ignore this, though as
mentioned before, there is an out via quantum non-locality.
In any case, static patterns are the product of awareness. but in our
S/O prison we experience that as "I see X", rather than "I am producing
X". DQ is presumably involved in their re-creation, but of course saying
that doesn't explain anything.
>
> I am interested in expectation because it shows how
> scientists are very comfortable with studying past processes (memory)
> but not so comfortable with studying future-oriented processes.
> First that jumping off a hot stove example that keeps coming up makes me think
> the MoQ (and maybe pragmatism?) is in the same boat.
I'm not following here. How does this relate to expectation? Can't one
jump off through instinct, not through consideration of future
consequences of not jumping off? That is, I believe this is a biological
static pattern. (And, of course, instinct is something else that is, to
us, totally mysterious in its workings).
By the way, scientists should be very *uncomfortable* about memory. The
idea that memory is stored in the brain (or anywhere), and therefore
capable of being studied is, in my opinion, absurd.
>
> We often discuss where MoQ differs from mainstream science but
> this there seems to be some agreement.
>
> Haith one particular developmental psychologist propose some hypotheses
> to why scientists are uncomfortable.
> 1) Scientists have favoritism for the concrete. The future is
> uncertain, ephemeral, and nonexistent. How can we talk about
> a nonevent? How can we think about brain processes that represent
> events have not yet occured
I think one is mistaken in assuming that the brain has anything to do
with the contents of consciousness at all. My favorite analogy is to
think of the brain as a multi-dimensional metronome. It keeps all the
sensory input in proper spatio-temporal order, but that's about all it
does. (This is pure conjecture on my part, by the way.)
>
> **** this relate to the MOQ in that how can we talk about
> levels that have not occurred
But maybe they have occurred in certain individuals (mystics).
>
> 2)Discomfort of scientists in dealing with reverse causality (teleology)
> The future seems to be backward in time, controlling what we do in the
> present.
>
> *** why we don't put on our hands on the much talked about stove
I don't think the future or the past are as we assume them to be. This,
to be sure, only replaces one mystery with another, but it does suggest
that science is not the right tool to begin with.
- Scott
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
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 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:24 BST