On Saturday, September 22, 2012 5:49:49 AM UTC-4, rclough wrote:
> Hi Craig Weinberg
> I would classify your items as follows:
> MENTAL (outside of spacetime) : All experiences, dreams, delusions,
> information, mathematics, logic, time,
> space, feelings, thoughts, ideas, numbers, life itself, God, monads,
> mathematics, physical laws themselves,
> theory of any type.
Huh? You are classifying "time, space" as "(outside of spacetime)".
If we recognize that experiences and dreams, feelings, thoughts, ideas,
life itself, rely on significance which builds through story-like
relations, and that they are not only cognitive but wordlessly emotional
then I don't think that "MENTAL" is a meaningful category nor is it correct
to consider these things separate from time. God, monads, physical laws,
logic, mathematics, information, theories, etc are accessed through
experiences in time, but represent space-like cognitive level qualia.
> PHYSICAL (within spacetime): Anything with dimensions, anything you can
> measure with physical instruments
> (even indirectly), weigh or see under a microscope or telescope, mass,
> energy, force, velocity, time, distance,
> voltage, optical or sound intensity, wave amplitude, dna type, cancer
> type, living tissue, dead tissue,
> flesh (brain).
I reject the assumption that the experiential aspects are not 'physical'
since our feelings and thoughts are profoundly and directly affected by
physical changes. It makes more sense to understand that the difference is
in public persistence across space as bodies as opposed to private
experience through time as significance.
> "Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen
> ----- Receiving the following content -----
> From: Craig Weinberg
> Receiver: everything-list
> Time: 2012-09-21, 10:58:11
> Subject: Physics, Metaphysics, and Realism
> I see all of our experiences, including dreams and delusions as being
> physical, but not necessarily ?eal?. To me, realism is a loose term
> describing the ?iddle of the road? range of experiences in which bodies and
> minds are clearly separate. The contrasting ?nreal? ranges are the
> profoundly spiritual/psychedelic/psychotic experiences and the profoundly
> logical/mathematical/abstracted principles, both of which can be understood
> as signifying real or more-than-real referents.
> Physical (< Unrealism of Logic < Realism of Bodies and Space ? Realism of
> Experiences and Time > Unrealism of Psyche >)*
> Metaphysical = Hypothetically outside of spacetime and matter.
> Energy = Logical conceptualization of the perception and participation of
> material bodies in spacetime.
> Information = Logical conceptualization of logic in spacetime.
> Logic = Phenomenology turned in on itself - subjectivity that seeks to
> evacuate subjectivity of itself, leaving purely universal and involuntary
> truths as a residual product.
> Psyche = Deep phenomenology. Unconstrained by logic, subjectivity is free
> to sense and dream itself into transpersonal and near-metaphysical ranges
> of experience.
> * This is the Multisense Continuum, which is involuted like a Mobius
> strip, and can be shuffled and turned around:
> < Unrealism of Logic
> < Realism of Bodies and Space ? Realism of Experiences and Time >
> Unrealism of Psyche >
> (? = ?erpendicular/orthogonal fold? relation of Pedestrian Realism, ie
> supermarket reality).
> ? Realism of Experiences and Time >
> Unrealism of Psyche > < Unrealism of Logic
> < Realism of Bodies and Space ?
> (> < = ?vanescent dissolve? relation of Profound Unrealism, ie hypnogogic
> trance, epiphany, transcendence, enlightnenment)
> The contemporary cosmology I would describe this way:
> Information Laws of Physics > Energy Matter ? Space Time
> The problems with this are embodied as problems with Idealism,
> Materialism, and Infocentrism, with each being unable to account for the
> prominence of the other without disqualifying it. Materialism makes
> information and subjectivity unreal, Idealism makes matter and spacetime
> unreal, Infocentricism makes matter and subjectivity unreal.
> Each of these three views have a blind spot for their own bias, which
> becomes pathological when applied in a thoroughly literal way to the the
> universe. Living beings become indistinguishable from programmed robots and
> animated cadavers. The world becomes an illusion conjurable by codes. We
> paint ourselves into a corner so that we are forced to conceive of
> ourselves paradoxically as epiphenomenal voyeurs yet inevitably omnipotent
> masters of the universe and ourselves.
> My approach, of course, is to weigh anchor with sense itself, as the
> primordial prerequisite of being and doing that is beneath and above all
> forms, materials, spaces, times, and subjective experiences. A neutral
> monism which projects itself within itself, always through juxtaposed
> experiences. Sense puts the 'in' into information and makes structures
> 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
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> For more options, visit this group at
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 email@example.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at