On Monday, September 3, 2012 8:33:34 AM UTC-4, rclough wrote:
>
>  Hi Craig Weinberg 
>  
> Personally I call the Platonic realm "anything inextended".
> Time necessarily drops out if space drops out.
>

I see the opposite. If space drops out, all you have is time. I can count 
to 10 in my mind without invoking any experience of space. I can listen to 
music for hours without conjuring any spatial dimensionality. I think that 
space is the orthogonal reflection of experience, and that time, is that 
reflection (space) reflected again back into experience a spatially 
conditioned a posteriori reification of experience.

Craig
 

>  
> Roger Clough, rcl...@verizon.net <javascript:>
> 9/3/2012 
> Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him 
> so that everything could function."
>
> ----- Receiving the following content ----- 
> *From:* Craig Weinberg <javascript:> 
> *Receiver:* everything-list <javascript:> 
> *Time:* 2012-08-31, 16:32:54
> *Subject:* Re: Re: Technological (Machine) Thinking and Lived Being 
> (Erlebnis)
>
>  
>
> On Friday, August 31, 2012 5:53:24 AM UTC-4, rclough wrote: 
>>
>>  Hi Craig Weinberg 
>>  
>> You're on the right track, but everybody from Plato on 
>> says that the Platonic world is timeless, eternal.
>> And nonextended or spaceless (nonlocal).
>> Leibniz's world of monads satisfies these requirements.
>>  
>> But there is more, there is the Supreme  Monad, which
>> experiences all. And IS the All.
>>  
>>
>
> Hegel and Spinoza have the Totality, Kabbala has Ein Sof, There's the Tao, 
> Jung's collective unconscious, there's Om, Brahman, Logos, Urgrund, Urbild, 
> first potency, ground of being, the Absolute, synthetic a prori, etc. 
>
> I call it the Totality-Singularity or just "Everythingness". It's what 
> there is when we aren't existing as a spatiotemporally partitioned subset. 
> It is by definition nonlocal and a-temporal as there is nothing to 
> constrain its access to all experiences.
>
> Craig
>
>   
>> Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
>> 8/31/2012 
>> Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him 
>> so that everything could function."
>>
>> ----- Receiving the following content ----- 
>> *From:* Craig Weinberg 
>> *Receiver:* everything-list 
>> *Time:* 2012-08-30, 13:53:09
>> *Subject:* Re: Technological (Machine) Thinking and Lived Being 
>> (Erlebnis)
>>
>>  I think that the Platonic realm is just time, and that time is nothing 
>> but experience.
>>
>> 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. 
>> 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.
>>
>> Craig
>>
>>
>> On Thursday, August 30, 2012 11:54:32 AM UTC-4, rclough wrote: 
>>>
>>>      What is thinking ? Parmenides thought that thinking and being are 
>>> one, which IMHO I agree with. 
>>>
>>> Thoughts come to us from the Platonic realm, which I personally, perhaps 
>>> mistakenly, 
>>>
>>> associate with what would be Penrose's incomputable realm. 
>>> Here is a brief discussion of technological or machine thinking vs 
>>> lived experience. 
>>> http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/ref/10.1080/00201740310002398#tabModule IMHO 
>>> Because computers cannot have lived experience, they cannot think. Inquiry: 
>>> An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy Volume 
>>> 46<http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/sinq20?open=46#vol_46>, 
>>> Issue 3 <http://www.tandfonline.com/toc/sinq20/46/3>, 2003 
>>>   
>>>  Thinking and Being: Heidegger and Wittgenstein on Machination and 
>>> Lived-Experience
>>>  Version of record first published: 05 Nov 2010
>>>      
>>> Heidegger's treatment of 'machination' in the Beitr锟�e zur Philosophie 
>>> begins the critique of technological thinking that would centrally 
>>> characterize his later work. Unlike later discussions of technology, the 
>>> critique of machination in Beitr锟�e connects its arising to the 
>>> predominance of 'lived-experience' ( Erlebnis ) as the concealed basis for 
>>> the possibility of a pre-delineated, rule-based metaphysical understanding 
>>> of the world. In this essay I explore this connection. The unity of 
>>> machination and lived-experience becomes intelligible when both are traced 
>>> to their common root in the primordial Greek attitude of techne , 
>>> originally a basic attitude of wondering knowledge of nature. But with this 
>>> common root revealed, the basic connection between machination and 
>>> lived-experience also emerges as an important development of one of the 
>>> deepest guiding thoughts of the Western philosophical tradition: the 
>>> Parmenidean assertion of the sameness of being and thinking. In the 
>>> Beitr锟�e 's analysis of machination and lived-experience, Heidegger hopes 
>>> to discover a way of thinking that avoids the Western tradition's constant 
>>> basic assumption of self-identity, an assumption which culminates in the 
>>> modern picture of the autonomous, self-identical subject aggressively set 
>>> over against a pre-delineated world of objects in a relationship of mutual 
>>> confrontation. In the final section, I investigate an important and 
>>> illuminating parallel to Heidegger's result: the consideration of the 
>>> relationship between experience and technological ways of thinking that 
>>> forms the basis of the late Wittgenstein's famous rule-following 
>>> considerations.
>>> everything-list
>>>  
>>>  
>>>  
>>>  Roger Clough, rcl...@verizon.net
>>> 8/30/2012 
>>> Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so 
>>> everything could function."
>>>
>> -- 
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>> "Everything List" group.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/WEvmwMTgZdoJ.
>> To post to this group, send email to everyth...@googlegroups.com.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
>> everything-li...@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit this group at 
>> http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
>>
>> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Everything List" group.
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/FR6988TpGPsJ.
> To post to this group, send email to everyth...@googlegroups.com<javascript:>
> .
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
> everything-li...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>.
> For more options, visit this group at 
> http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/Up3mOfKio5AJ.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Reply via email to