[Ham]: > If nothing makes sense, philosophy is meaningless, and so is the universe.
But it doesn't follow that the opposite is true: viz., if the universe is meaningless, then nothing makes sense. [Ham] > To imagine the universe as bereft of cognizant awareness is a nihilistic > fantasy. It's easy for me to imagine the world without life, or without me in it. [Ham] > If you don't believe sensibility is foundational, you've rejected the very > point of human existence. There's no reason to assume human existence has a point (or even different points.) [Ham]: > Even Pirsig posits experiential awareness as the "cutting edge of reality". But not necessarily HUMAN experential awareness. [Ham] > In my view, electrons and positrons, quarks and anti-matter, are intellectual > constructs of value- > sensibility. Their existence depends on your experience. & my experience on their existence. [Ham]: :> Are enlightened humans so arrogant that they refuse to acknowledge the choreography of the > universe as beyond their finite intelligence? That's just the reason one shouldn't advocate a metaphysics that is beyond our finite intelligence. [Ham] > Meaning and purpose do not change over time. False, as an empirical statement. Or do you have something else in mind? [Ham] > You are as much a part of your world now as you were before the Big Bang. I am completely a part of my world now & I was not part of any world then. [Ham] > These are my conclusions and my values, and no one knows them better than I > do. Subordinating > my concepts to peer review would only bend them to conform to the collective > mind. There's a > plentitude of published works out there aimed at making us think like > "everybody else". You've a mistaken conception of peer review. The purpose of peer review is not to find someone more familiar with your views than you are, nor to change your views. It's to give you an advance perspective on how your expected readers will see your work & to identify any "blind spots" in your presentation. [Craig, previously] > Has your forthcoming book had any peer review? [Ham] > No...But thanks for the suggestion. It was a question, not a suggestion. I suggest peer review. Craig 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/
