On Wednesday, October 16, 2013 11:58:27 PM UTC-4, Liz R wrote:
>
> Let's start at the very beginning.
> (It's a very good place to start.)
>

I think before anything can 'begin' there already has to be awareness or 
sense. Presence. A capacity to discern difference from indifference and to 
participate in projecting that discernment as an effect. Without that, 
there is no difference between nothingness and something that can ever 
become a 'beginning'.

To get to a beginning, there would have to be a lot more sensible 
tendencies - a sense of memory, a sense of cause, etc.

It gets difficult because at this primitive level of the cosmos, time is 
not coherent, so it is as much the distant past as the far future, as it is 
the present moment. It is not an event in time, it is the solitude implicit 
within every time, every beginning. On that level, all of eternity is a 
single tick of an infinitely slow clock which has not even begun yet, but 
its perpetual expectation is the infinite well of entropy-negentropy that 
keeps everything spinning.
 

>
>
> On 17 October 2013 16:56, Craig Weinberg <whats...@gmail.com <javascript:>
> > wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Wednesday, October 16, 2013 11:39:49 PM UTC-4, Liz R wrote:
>>
>>> On 17 October 2013 16:29, Craig Weinberg <whats...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'm trying to say that our contemporary approach to understanding 
>>>> awareness is fatally flawed. It suffers from a leaky philosophical vacuum, 
>>>> and maybe the premature confidence of a teenage civilization that imagines 
>>>> it to be finishing a race that is only halfway done.
>>>>
>>>> OK, that's something I can understand (and even agree with). So do you 
>>> have some idea about how we *should* be understanding awareness, and 
>>> can you explain it simply, and preferably without doing violence to, for 
>>> example, our understanding of how TV sets work? (Or if you do have to do 
>>> violence to that notion, could you only do so after explaining how and why 
>>> you need to do violence to it, rather than throwing the idea into the 
>>> conversation willy-nilly and expecting the audience to understand?!)
>>>
>>> Explaining in the style of Bruno and comp, for example, would be good...
>>>
>>
>> I have a lot written already. It depends which aspects you are interested 
>> in. Philosophy of mind positions? Mathematical abstractions? Diagrams? 
>> Podcasts or videos?
>>
>> http://multisenserealism.com/about/introduction/
>>
>> http://multisenserealism.com/consciousness-problems-and-possible-solutions/the-four-problems-of-studying-consciousness/
>>
>> http://multisenserealism.com/about/why-pip-and-msr-solves-the-hard-problem-of-consciousness/
>>
>>
>> http://multisenserealism.com/thesis/a-new-theory-of-information/multisense-mathematics/non-well-founded-identity-principle/
>>
>> http://multisenserealism.files.wordpress.com/2013/07/trini1.jpg
>>
>> http://multisenserealism.com/about/radio-and-tv-interviews/
>>
>>
>>  -- 
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>> "Everything List" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
>> email to everything-li...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>.
>> To post to this group, send email to everyth...@googlegroups.com<javascript:>
>> .
>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>>
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to