Hi Bo & All,
> or maybe something else.. ;-)
Maybe this hypothesis has value.. but I guess it wouldn't pass the test of
experience.
The origin of time (where is it from?):
"The event that makes the subject aware of the object, which means that
quality isn't the result of a collision between the two, but the other way
around. The quality event is the cause of both subjects and objects!"
Potential:
"From memory we can recall past experiences, and our memory of each of these
experiences can include the memory of what was already in our Memory."
Value:
"Time can then be used to bring coherence to these sequences of experiences"
Process:
- Relevant perception (example: baby being breastfeeded)
- Memory/Imagination
...
- Repetition of the "picture" (perception)
- Memory/Imagination
- Quality event - awareness of the similitude
- Memory/Imagination
- Quality event - concept of sequence / concept of time / concept of
irreversibility / ...
(Potential Value ----DQ----> Static Value)
Joao
PS: Bo, I acknowledge your criticisms and promise to evolve.. be patient.
But I insist:
> we are back to the language problem itself.
IMO, language will always be an issue.
Replying to a Zen student that insisted that it must be possible for him to
tell them what Zen was, the master replied:
"If you must insist on words," the Roshi replied, "then Zen is an elephant
copulating with a flea."
------- End of forwarded message -------
MOQ.org - http://www.moq.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:03:31 BST