On Thursday, August 30, 2012 2:00:49 PM UTC-4, Stephen Paul King wrote:
> On 8/30/2012 1:53 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
> > I think that the Platonic realm is just time, and that time is nothing
> > but experience.
> Hi Craig,
> I would say that time is the sequencing order of experience. The
> order of simultaneously givens within experience is physical space.
I can go along with that. It's hard to know whether that sequencing arises
as a function of space. It takes us years to develop a robust sense of time
and it is hard to know how much of that is purely neurological maturation
and how much has to do with the integration of external world events. For
example, if you had a dream journal and I read you five dreams randomly
from 1982 until now, I don't think you would be as successful in putting
them in order as you would if I read you five journal entries of yours that
were from your spacetime experience.
I think that time as you mean it, in the sense of sequence, is imported
from our interactions in public space into conceptual availability as
memory. The actual 'substance' of time, as in a universal cosmological
force is nothing but experience itself. It is more the ground from which
sequence can emerge than a fully realized sequential nature of experience.
It's more like dreamtime. Memories can appear out of nowhere. Timelines can
be uncertain and irrelevant.
> > Thought is the experience of generating hypothetical experience.
> > The mistake is presuming that because we perceive exterior realism as
> > a topology of bodies that the ground of being must be defined in those
> > terms.
> The mistake of subtracting the observer from observations.
Exactly. The voyeur habit is the hardest to kick.
> > In fact, the very experience you are having right now - with your eyes
> > closed or half asleep...this is a concretely and physically real part
> > of the universe, it just isn't experienced as objects in space because
> > you are the subject of the experience.
> > If anything, the outside world is a Platonic realm of geometric
> > perspectives and rational expectations. Interior realism is private
> > time travel and eidetic fugues; metaphor, irony, anticipations, etc.
> > Not only Platonic, but Chthonic. Thought doesn't come from a realm,
> > realms come from thought.
> Thoughts might be defined as the very act of n-th order
Yeah, I like that. The 'in the sense of' sense of sense. In one way it is
the closest to pure sense, in another way it is the most aloof and unreal.
The paradox of surfaces and depth.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit
To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at