clark (clark@netsites.net)
Thu, 4 Dec 1997 04:51:03 +0100
----------
> From: Doug Renselle <renselle@on-net.net>
> To: Multiple recipients of <lilasqd@mail.hkg.com>
> Subject: LS Re: another question
> Date: Wednesday, December 03, 1997 12:22 PM
>
> Hi Bo and TLS!
>
> Bodvar Skutvik wrote:
> >
> > Hello Ken and LS.
> >
> > The Libet Experiment continued...................................
> ...
> >
> > What I will add for my own account is that this is a biological
> > equivalent to Quantum Physics.
> ...
> > No, the SOM is incapable of explaining it, but the MOQ
> > - which is built upon the very idea of a ladder of levels - can, at
> > least do I feel its potential here. The Intellectual level (in the
> > consciousness sense) is the last instance to be notified, but a lot o
> > "subjective" tricking is needed for it to look as the initiator and
> > arbiter of things. Okay, it CAN interrupt and override lower level's
> > workings (as can the Social level), but then one becomes awkward and
> > "self-conscious". (I know it only too well!)
> >
> ...
> > If anyone managed to read this. Thanks.
> >
> > Bo.
> Bo and TLS,
>
> Good stuff Bo. If you recall, I think Hugo, Gene, and I touched on this
> from a different perspective some time ago. Hugo, more recently
> emphasized the issue for discussion here. Platt, I think intuits this
> well. Clearly, you do.
>
> Good old SOM...It will let you down every time.
>
> Allow me to put a slightly different 'spin' on this.
>
> Libet's interpretation of a backwards in time effect is purely a
> manifestation of a SOMite viewing reality with SOM blinders on.
>
> What do we know SOM always does? It limits our thinking to the
> objective aspects of reality (as you eloquently stated above). It also
> practices biformal and human-centric thought dogma/doctrine (which keeps
> the SOMites forever caught in their underware of paradice [i.e.,
> paradoxes]).
>
> According to SOM, humans are unique, separate, reducible, local, and
> isolable. Humans each have (a, one, [1]) mind. The mind is located in
> the skull ("How could it possibly be anywhere else?"). SOMites have a
> hard time even accepting the fact that animals have minds, let alone
> lesser SPoVs (Static/stable Patterns of Value). But if they do allow
> for other SPoVs to have minds - the minds, as always by SOM edict, are
> located in the skull. Minds are localized according to SOM. Even if we
> say sentience is a precursor to mind, the SOMites still say sentience is
> unique to humans and it still resides only in the skull.
>
> MoQ, QM (quantum mechanics), and Zen say sentience is not local. Hugo
> averred this very well recently. Herrigel's experience with the Zen
> Master, and Capra's chapter on 'interpenetration' make it (to some still
> quite speculatively) clear that sentience scales and is ubiquitous.
> Sentience appears to be a dynamic interrelationship among ALL SPoVs and
> DQ (Dynamic Quality).
>
> If this is true (and I believe it is -- and the quantum physicists
> resist admitting it, but quite bluntly they have proven it
> [acknowledging the limits of proof]), it explains why the inorganic
> level can sense and react far quicker (for the good of GOOD SPoV's
> survival) than the intellectual level.
>
> >From the objective, in-the-skull-centric context a subjective backwards
> in time rationale is the only thing that can possibly be true as Libet
> concluded (or else we just have another one of the many classical SOM
> paradice).
>
> But from the non-centric-, ubiquitous- and scaled-sentient context,
> there is no need for the backwards in time rationale. As you stated,
> Bo, the sentience at the inorganic and biological levels acted before
> and without control from the intellectual level.
>
> For me this is further evidence of Pirsig's vast prescience. It is
> further evidence of the potent analogue twixt MoQ and QM. It is further
> evidence that MoQ's subsumption of SOM must happen sooner than later
> (Platt, et al., that is precisely why I am an activist.).
>
> I don't know about you, but it dismays me that the future of our world
> is partially/mostly in the hands of SOM-landers. You may assuage my
> negative energy on this, but still I do not like it!
>
> Thanks Bo!
>
> Mtty,
>
> Doug Renselle.
> >
> --
> "That figure whose attitude best expresses the passion that moves it is
> most worthy of praise."
>
> Leonardo da Vinci, MS 2038, Biblioteque Nationale, Paris, 29v.
>
>
> --
> post message - mailto:lilasqd@hkg.com
> unsubscribe/queries - mailto:diana@asiantravel.com
> homepage - http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/4670
>
>
Doug,
I was just sitting here wrestling with autonomous nervous systems and
taxis and synapse times in an attempt to explain Bo's experimental
presentation when your message came in. It reminded me that I still haven't
shaken the SOM mindset. It is more fun for me to ride the coattails of the
Lila Squad to a rather slow understanding of the Quality concept. Thanks
for the help. Ken
-- post message - mailto:lilasqd@hkg.com unsubscribe/queries - mailto:diana@asiantravel.com homepage - http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/4670
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu May 13 1999 - 16:42:25 CEST