Yes, no??  It could be perhaps that matter, ie brain, etc is the memory of an 
experience, ie 
its form, model, mapping and the brain, as a whole a composite of the lot. Not 
the tissue but 
the neural traces.  At least that's how I think of it, matter being those 
memory traces that 
work and fantasy ones that don't quite make it or have not made it yet. After 
all a baby, when 
born is a not yet finished form and both body and brain are added'extended by 
what intrigues, 
turns on and off that baby. I recently planted some nettles [ I use them for 
gout ] and the 
plant retracted down to the roots to re-emerge again. I think of that as it 
having to get used 
to a new soil condition from the transplant. Carl Jung with his patients made 
them draw 
mandalas of their psyche. The same thing, when it changed it went into a null 
state to 
re-emerge with a new, another mandala.
However since reality does not listen to us, we have to conform with it, you 
can only tell by 
whether it works in harmony with the rest. That is a sort of ecological view of 
it. It sort of 
makes me feel OK about it. Not a clue what it does for others. And I don't 
imagine IT is much 
concerned with how the material aspect of our being thinks of it by way of what 
individuals do.

""Pooh knew what he meant, but, being a Bear of Very  Little Brain, couldn't 
think of the 
words. --The House At Pooh Corner
"""The sun was so delightfully warm, and the stone, which had been sitting in 
it for a long 
time, was so warm, too, that Pooh had almost decided to go on being Pooh in the 
middle of the 
stream for the rest of the morning... --The House At Pooh Corner

"""There is nothing lacking in you, and you yourself are no different from the 
Buddha. Be 
boundless and absolutely free from all conditions. Be free to go in any 
direction you like. Do 
not act to do good, nor to pursue evil. Whether you walk or stay, sit or lie 
down, all are the 
wonderful activity of the Great Enlightened One. It is all joy, free from 
anxiety - it is 
called Buddha.  --Tao-hsin

"""As a man who has devoted his whole life to the most clear headed science, to 
the study of 
matter, I can tell you as a result of my research about atoms this much: There 
is no matter as 
such. All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings 
the particle of 
an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom 
together. We must 
assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind. 
This mind is the 
matrix of all matter.  * “Das Wesen der Materie” (The Nature of Matter), speech 
at Florence, 
Italy, 1944 (from Archiv zur Geschichte der Max-Planck-Gesellschaft, Abt. Va, 
Rep. 11 Planck, 
Nr. 1797)

'Wesen" in German means most what Heidegger called Dasein, ie being IN  
"ITness".

adrian



Mynsie wrote:
> Is it perhaps, rather than "intelligence" the memory of experience at  
> play here,
> not necessarily our own, but a "collective memory?
> 
> Merrie
> ----------------------
> A closed mouth gathers no feet.
> 
> On 22-Oct-08, at 5:23 AM, archytas wrote:
> 
>> This no knowing does not help much in understanding why I do not allow
>> my grandson to play in traffic.
>> Brains don't know, people do - yet there seems to be 'intelligence' at
>> work in all information exchange, or possibly a world of information
>> as well as matter.  Organisations (organic and otherwise) 'know' in
>> some senses.  I'd just question whether the question gives us
>> important leads.
>> On 21 Oct, 13:37, adrian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>   The "knowing brain" does not know anything, it's a fiction.
>>> Reality per se does not need or use a map or mapping code, though  
>>> we do in 3rd person mode.
>>> Reality exists before man and after man, as nicely themed by  
>>> Stapledon. Consciousness, soul,
>>> sentience or whatever the blah word chosen is the bottom line. Chop  
>>> that out and there is no
>>> knowing. And, yes 'know' is one of the less felicitous words  
>>> around. Castaneda uses tonal and
>>> nagual, which is a traditional dualism when respective to real and  
>>> illusion there is no dualism
>>> possible.
>>>
>>> adrian
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
> 
> > 
> 


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Epistemology" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to