On Wednesday, September 5, 2012 8:11:39 AM UTC-4, rclough wrote:
>
>  Hi Craig Weinberg 
>  
> Exactly.  There may a problem with this, but its seems
> that if mind is everywhere (is inextended, so space is irrelevant), 
> I am always part of the mind of God. So saying that-  when I look out
> of my eyes, that is actually God looking out- which sounds
> of course weird. Or that there is only one perceiver, that being
> the Supreme Monad, is not illogical. 
>  
>

I don't think that it sounds any weirder to say that then to say that when 
we look out of our eyes, we can see is the dust from the Big Bang. We are 
the totality-singularity (Supreme Monad or everythingness, etc) subdivided 
as reflected capacities to experience. The universe is nothing but a 
capacity to experience and to juxtapose that capacity with itself (which is 
what experience actually is).

Craig


 
>  
>  
> Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net <javascript:>
> 9/5/2012 
> 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:* 2012-09-04, 20:50:39
> *Subject:* Re: consciousness as the experiencre of time
>
>  That's what I'm saying. You can have ideal consciousness without space.
>
> On Tuesday, September 4, 2012 7:56:36 AM UTC-4, rclough wrote: 
>>
>>  Hi Craig Weinberg 
>>  
>> The experience of time is called consciousness, the simplest kind.
>>  
>>  
>> Roger Clough, rcl...@verizon.net
>> 9/4/2012 
>> 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:* 2012-09-04, 00:48:59
>> *Subject:* Re: Personally I call the Platonic realm "anything 
>> inextended".Anything outside of spacetime.
>>
>>  
>> 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
>>> 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 
>>> *Receiver:* everything-list 
>>> *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.
>>> 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/-/Up3mOfKio5AJ.
>> 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/-/Gh1rzyxA10QJ.
> 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/-/-2Y209tjnEsJ.
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