Hi Gary:
> > I take it then that your answer to the question, "What's the mind in?"
> > would be "In the human body." Is that correct? If so, the next question
> > naturally would be, "What's the body in?"
>
> Gary's answer: The body is not "in" anything, unless you want to consider
> the universe is a continuum of all prevasive matter & energy which is
> configured in stable patterns of quality. Then I'ld say that the body is
> "in" that field of matter & energy, like all of existence.
If all of existence is in a field of matter and energy, what's the field in?
Or to put it another way, how does space/time configure in your
metaphysics?
> I guess you could characterize my essay as "scientific materialism
> with God accounting for the mysteries that science has failed to
> explain...." But, that reduce my map into the lowest common denominator.
> Never felt that this was a very good idea. The point is not in what is
> shared in common, but what is the differences! Reduction down gets you
> into "scientific materialism" is a part of Western Cultural heritage and my
> map is a part of that heritage. Yes, but so what. Reducing down to common
> similarities takes away from the significance, the quality. Pirsig can be
> reduced down to a map discussing the mind-body problem. But this distorts
> the significance of Pirsig's work and hides the difference and the newness
> that Pirsig brings. Pirsig answered the mind-body problem by saying that
> it was a mistake to focus on that separation at the start of one's
> metaphysical map making. Start with Quality and then work your way to
> minds and bodies. My map is not merely "scientific materialism". It is,
> using Pirsig, a whole new map. My map and Pirsig replaces "scientific
> materialism". Generally in my experience boiling down anything results in
> very bland food. I tend not to cook that way.
Sorry if I offended you. Since you "boiled down" the thoughts of Pirsig,
Wilber, Harth, Lao Tsu, Koestler and others in your essay, I thought it
would be OK to do the same regarding your thoughts. What I tried to
do was summarize your major point or points. The following from your
essay seemed to do the job very well:
"The universe is made up of energy and matter and that is all, nothing
else but this. What makes for the rich diversity of existence is structure.
. . . I believe that Quality is the Internal aspect and cause of the diverse
configuration of structure Externally and Internally of all energy and
matter in the Universe on all levels. I believe that mind and spirit are the
internal experience and the internal attributes of the external
arrangements of energy and matter."
Can I assume this is a correct "boiled down" version of your main
thesis? If so, would you be willing to discuss this version further?
Platt
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