[Ham]:
> Basically, a self-supporting universe which organizes its elements to
> produce
> conscious life makes no sense without a designer.
[Ham]
Making sense is fundamental to understanding and philosophy. If nothing
makes sense, philosophy is
meaningless, and so is the universe. To imagine the universe as bereft
of
cognizant awareness is a nihilistic fantasy. Not only would there be no
awareness of it, there would be no value in it. If you don't believe
sensibility is foundational, you've rejected the very point of human
existence.
[Ham]
What is this postmodern obsession
to deny meaning and purpose in the world? Are enlightened humans so
arrogant that they refuse to acknowledge the choreography of the
universe as
beyond their finite intelligence?
[Ron]
Pre-cognitive intellectual
cutting edge experience is just as much a product of prior
recognition of associated patterns as cognitive intellect
and that the two feed into one another along with experiential
sensory stimuli to produce the world we perceive.
"Visual perception is discontinuous, seeing consists physically
of separate glances, each lasting about a quarter of a second.
(the world may disappear in the intervals and we would never know it)
The brain pieces together these distinct stimuli to construct an image
of a stable and continuous world."
" What enters the eye is not really seen until it is organized by the
brain.
To see what is the case requires context, inference, concepts,
experience, interpretation." Man is the Measure" by Reuben Abel
he goes on to say:
" The selective nature of perception is also a consequence of the
fact that the number of sensory stimuli, or possible messages from
outside, is greater than we can receive and process. The channels
of communication to us are crowded and noisy; we must filter
stimuli. What we receive is usually what we expect, or want, or
believe, or are used to. Our eyes and brains coordinate how objects
look at different distances, from different directions, and
under different light, and show us an object to which we attribute
a constant size, shape, and color. To perceive is to solve a problem.
Our capacity "to find strands of permanence in the tumult of changing
appearances" (Polanyi) has survival value. Gestalt psychologists' stress
how we tend to perceive well defined patterns and wholes which are not
really there, by integrating heterogeneous cues and filling in
contours."
[Ron]
To perceive forms in the infinite is what the mind does, it has survival
value.
The mind tends to exaggerate and simplify for purposes of memory recall.
The ability to remember and project, to manipulate symbols and perceive
pattern,
Creates the illusion of form and purpose, of time and space.
Therefore it is difficult for me to accept theories of purpose, meaning
and form
When they are useful tools for survival and not much more. They are
powerful,
let me not underscore their value, they are supreme indeed to the human
condition.
You who would give form to the formless, meaning to the meaningless
Contradicts your own understanding of the individual, that proprietary
Value awareness is foundational. Anything you say about it only applies
To your own experience and can never apply to anyone else's.
By attempting to influence views and expounding thesis and rally support
Gain followers or garner acceptance, you contradict your own ontology.
For it can only ever be an ontology of one. Of the individual.
[Craig]:
> Ham,
> Has your forthcoming book had any peer review?
[Ham]
No, and neither has my life experience. 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". Consider the school texts that are brainwashing
our
next generation to regard multiculturalism and egalitarianism as the
only
kind of enlightened society. Soon individual ideas will be denounced as
anarchy, and human achievement will be reduced to the lowest common
denominator.
{Ron]
By your own thesis the individual may never be suppressed, that no
amount of
Unifying conformity will ever extinguish individual proprietary
awareness.
Therefore multiculturalism can only serve to open understanding between
Individuals, correct? Equality of being can in no way discount
individuality.
I see conflicts of interest between you and your thesis.
Thanks for allowing me to comment.
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/
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/
