RE: MD Plotinus, Pirsig and Wilber

From: Scott Roberts (jse885@earthlink.net)
Date: Wed Aug 18 2004 - 21:58:18 BST

  • Next message: Paul Turner: "RE: MD The individual in the MOQ"

    Paul,

    > Scott said:
    > I am pointing out that if we assume that our sense perceptions are
    > caused by
    > spatio-temporal things and events, and those spatio-temporal events are
    > all
    > that is real, then there couldn't be sense perceptions, since sense
    > perceptions require continuity.
    >
    > Paul:
    > Right, but the MOQ doesn't assume that sense perceptions are caused by
    > spatio-temporal events nor does it assume spatio-temporal events are all
    > that is real.

    What I was arguing against is the idea that consciousness could emerge from
    the non-conscious, which, you are correct, is not a MOQ claim. But it is a
    Darwinian claim, with which the MOQ "has no quarrel". As I see it, my
    argument is an out-and-out quarrel with Darwinism, while the MOQ just
    ignores this issue, and hence has no basis for a philosophy of mind. In my
    view, one should not only just not assume that spatio-temporal events are
    all that is real, but actually show the necessity of the
    non-spatio-temporal, which the MOQ does not do, as far as I am aware.

    >
    > Why do sense perceptions *require* continuity? For some reason, I am
    > thinking about the arguments of the ancient Greeks about this, Zeno's
    > paradox and such, although I forget the detail.

    Because sense perceptions are extended and have parts, but are perceived as
    wholes. One perceives a melody, one doesn't perceive a note, then another
    note, and then in a separate act put them together. Or one can focus on a
    note, but it extends through time also. This putting together happens
    subconsciously, if it can be said to "happen" at all.

    There is a strong relation to Zeno's paradoxes, which are basically
    pointing out the problem of the one and the many. Zeno's solution is to
    drop the many. The materialist's is to drop the one. But as I see it if you
    drop either, you can't have sense perception (where the one is continuity
    and the many is change). The MOQ does not address the problem, even in
    Chapter 8, where other platypi are supposedly resolved.

    (By the way, not that it is really germaine, but it is often said that
    modern mathematics, in particular the mathematics of limits, has resolved
    Zeno's paradoxes. First, it only applies to some (like Achilles and the
    Tortoise), but actually the resolution depends on mathematical constructs
    (the infnitesimal) that would not apply if quantum mechanics is valid. In
    QM there is, so to speak, a shortest length and shortest time, where for
    anything less than that. the laws of spacetime, and these mathematical
    constructs, don't work.)

    - Scott

    MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
    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 2.1.5 : Wed Aug 18 2004 - 23:40:08 BST