From: Platt Holden (pholden@sc.rr.com)
Date: Fri Sep 09 2005 - 14:43:22 BST
Hi Ham -- (Paul mentioned)
> Behind that facade of polite naiveté is an urge to shoot holes in my
> theory. That's all right, Platt; I'd probably do the same if it was yours.
> What I said was:
I have an urge to understand. If in so doing some holes appear, I hope you
would take that in a positive light, allowing you to plug the holes of any
misunderstanding.
> > Everything you experience in the world is an "other"
> > to yourself.
>
> Your interrupted with:
>
> > Do you mean "other to yourself" as "outside my body?" No.
> > That can't be it because I experience a lot that goes on inside
> > my body like heart palpitations and hunger, not to mention
> > thoughts. Do you mean I can't get outside myself to
> > see myself? True I can't see me as others see me, but
> > I can see me like nobody else can in the sense that I alone
> > feel my joy, pain, guilt, love, etc.
>
> I include your body in the world you experience, and I treat man's
> biological organism and all its neurological components as "otherness" in
> my thesis. What is left is that which cannot be defined as an entity or
> event in the physical world, namely, your awareness of a self with
> feelings. Your last sentence says it all. Those emotions you have
> enumerated express what I call "conditional" or relational values. They
> paint your portrait in the hall of Essence. (How's that for an anology?)
Love you analogy! OK. You identify the "I" that knows me as nonphysical
awareness. I presume such awareness is also characteristic of all life
forms, but not nonlife forms like protons and atoms and such. Is that
correct?
Your further explained:
> Let me say in closing that the single, most important concept I'm trying to
> get across to all of you is that some form of Awareness is the basis of all
> reality, including its essential source.
OK. Without awareness, no reality. Does that mean if there is no awareness
of a physical object or event, the object or event doesn't exist? If so,
how does that different from philosophical Idealism which I understand to
mean there are no "real objects" behind our perceptions.
As I said, I need to go at this one little step at a time, Ham. Later, I
will ask what is the source of awareness and what that has to do with
nothingness. But, please. One thing at a time. For now, I need to know
whether you repudiate, like Paul, the prior assumption of an
appearance/reality distinction.
Thanks so much for your patience.
Best,
Platt
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 : Fri Sep 09 2005 - 16:08:46 BST