Ron [Marsha mentioned] --


> When I wiki "essentialism" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essentialism
> the explanation of it is akin to Plato's forms and holds that these
> forms are fixed and absolute.
> Ham, Is the Essentialism described in Wikipedia the same, close,
> or another school of thought when compared to your Ontology?

The simplest answer is that Wiki's article has used Essentialism to identify 
Plato's Idealism, which does not represent my philosophy.  Plato regarded 
the nature of things as "essences" and attributed them to ideas, which he 
regarded as "eternal".  This has nothing to do with Essence as I have 
theorized it, nor did Plato call his philosophy Essentialism.

The word means many things to many people.  I define Essence as "the 
ultimate, unconditional, necessary Source or 'whatness' of reality."  There 
is only one Essence; anything else is an "essent" in my philosophy, meaning 
something divided by nothingness.  Thus, things and creatures are essents, 
and their only connection to Essence is value-sensibility -- the 
differentiated perception of the absolute source by which creatures and 
their awareness subsist.

Concerning Marsha's quote from Pirsig's MOQ summary, I do not consider the 
MOQ a "method of investigation, a tool for a more accurate perception...in 
value perception."  I consider it a euphemistic perspective, albeit one 
presented with poetic touches.  What scientist would seriously consider the 
Metaphysics of Quality an "investigative tool"?  I certainly wouldn't 
presume to claim this for Essentialism.   And what is "more accurate" about 
a morality that says, "Some things are better than others?"  Let's get 
"real", Mr. Pirsig!

He goes on...
"Noether's theorem, the conservation of energy is a consequence of the
fact that the laws of physics do not change over time."

If that is true, then the laws of physics cannot be proven false, which puts 
physical science in the same class as the religion Mr. Pirsig demeans.  I 
think you'll find that quite a few laws of physics have at least been 
modified, even since Einstein's time.

"Dualism dissolves in the light of this theory for all (including space and 
consciousness) is
energy."

So Mind, Matter, and Reality are all energy.  I guess that includes Quality 
as well!

Once again, this is not a philosopher talking; it's an evolutionist who 
likes to paint existence in nice-sounding cliches that make us feel good 
about reality.  I, for one, will not buy into the theory that reality is 
fundamentally a Goodness called energy, no matter how simple it sounds.

Good luck to all,
Ham


Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/

Reply via email to