On Thu, May 19, 2005 at 07:29:33AM -0700, James N Rose wrote:
> I would like to gather everyone's attention to point to
> an essential conceptual error that exists in the current 
> debating points of this topic, which in fact has been
> an egregious error in logic for the past 2500 years,
> ever since Plato.


> In 1996 at "Towards a Science of Consciousness" (Tucson) I presented
> several exhibits, each one highlighting some specific relational qualia
> of existence in isolation, and identifying each/all in reagrd to a
> potential single holistic description of being -and- performances of
> being.
> The one that has bearing here, was simply an apple - inside a black box
> which no light could enter, until the box was opened and photons could
> reach the surface of the apple.
> The discussion point went something like this:  In contradistinction to 
> the 2500 years old 'definition' of self and completeness set forth by
> Plato in his discussions of 'real' vis a vis 'ideal', notice is heregiven
> that the apple inside the closed box is - ideally - an entity which 
> is without color ... absolutely and always - even though weak-logic
> presumes and assigns color 'to' things and entities, de facto.
> The full existential extent and outer-bound limit of the apple goes
> -only- up to BUT NOT BEYOND its physical manifestation; in this case
> in entity: its skin.  Where skin -ends-, "apple" .. -ends- and does 
> not 'exist'.
> However,
> 'color' - that which we first-order associate -with- apple, exists -solely-
> in that region -outside and beyond- ... where 'apple' does not exist.  By
> sheer rigid definition of 'existence' - and logical definitions re 'sets' -
> apple and 'color' are and always must be -mutually exclusive-, with no Venn
> intersection at all. 
> Conclusions:  
> 1. No entity is 'complete' in and of itself; entities are "completed" only 
> in co-presence of external environmentals.
> 2. Systems and entities -will have- qualia that exist (emergently) from
> I-Thou relations which they may not be internally aware of, or be self 
> appreciative of, nor the impacts of these qualia on their 'self'.
> First and Third frames of reference can never be identical, and   
> 'exhibition of qualia' versus 'access to qualia for feedback purposes'
> are quite different things.
> Cybernetic secondary connections 'smooth' and blur this relationship
> of being.
> (there is more, but I don't have time at the moment to continue; sorry
> to do a 'fermat', but I'll write again, if anyone cares to explore this
> thread after this posting today)
> Jamie Rose
> 19 May 2005

Agreed that colour is not a characteristic of an object in itself. How
does this impact on the debate, however?

*PS: A number of people ask me about the attachment to my email, which
is of type "application/pgp-signature". Don't worry, it is not a
virus. It is an electronic signature, that may be used to verify this
email came from me if you have PGP or GPG installed. Otherwise, you
may safely ignore this attachment.

A/Prof Russell Standish                  Phone 8308 3119 (mobile)
Mathematics                                    0425 253119 (")
UNSW SYDNEY 2052                         [EMAIL PROTECTED]             
Australia                                http://parallel.hpc.unsw.edu.au/rks
            International prefix  +612, Interstate prefix 02

Attachment: pgpMcqeRxZUqL.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to