comments below.... --- Krimel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> gav, follow-up: they are both relative terms. i am > saying that choosing one > polar option or the other is the characteristic SOM > approach - adversarial > dichotomies. pirsig's novel approach to the twin > horns of these dilemmas was > to reject both, to go between them to the unitary > origin of both. > > Krimel > So what's the middle way between life, intelligence > and consciousness > growing organically as the conditions here support > it and life being created > or managed by a higher consciousness or absolute > source? gav: the middle way between subject and object is quality/experience/Tao - the dynamic source of both. > > gav, follow-up: it can't be. experience is unitary > and prior to polar > relativisation. > > Krimel > You say experience is unitary. But isn't experience > comprised of five senses > transducing energy from the environment into > electo-chemical patterns in the > nerves. Aren't those neural patterns filtered > through memories and emotions > and organized into a whole experience? gav: experience is pre-intellectual. experience isn't comprised of anything - it is prior to 'things'. remember dreams are experienced without using the bodily senses. when you see do you see with two eyes or one? can you see your own head? you perceive from the 'headless' space atop our shoulders...see douglas harding's 'headless way' for an interesting western mystical tradition. "The average person, while he thinks he is awake, actually is half asleep. By 'half asleep' I mean that his contact with reality is a very partial one; most of what he believes to be reality (outside or inside of himself) is a set of fictions which his mind constructs. He is aware of reality only to the degree to which his social functioning makes it necessary. I believe I see - but I only see words; I believe I feel, but I only think feelings. The cerebrating person is the alienated person." -- Erich Fromm sloughing away all the concepts that get between 'reality' and 'self' is the only way to know what reality is, that is *to experience it*, undivided. this is of course the logic behind any meditative activity. > > gav, follow-up: the solar system seems to be net > entropic...yet life is a > force that is in oppositional balance to this - > anti-entropic. evolution. > time may wear down the mightiest mountain....but > evolution moves in the > opposite direction - towards the creation of higher > energy states. elan > vital, as bergson put it. > > Krimel > Have you considered that the élan vital might be > sunlight? Is my car being > anti-entropic by speeding up when I give it more > gas? gav: elan vital is the vital spirit within and essential to all life that wills it onwards into new territory. your car isn't being anti-entropic, it is probably being more highly entropic as more gas would probably be wasted as heat and noise energy. > > gav: the universe cannot be separated from we > humans. 'we' bringing stuff to > the table is how the universe brings stuff to the > table. meaning can be > split into two kinds - implicit and explicit. there > is no explicit meaning > without humans. all experience is implicitly > meaningful. > > Krimel > Where does the stuff we bring to the table come > from? > What meaning is implied or explicated when we sleep > or pass out? What is the > meaning of experiences we have forgotten or never > remembered? > In fact how can there be meaning without memory? dreams are private myths, myths are public dreams. myth is meaningful. implicit meaning is gnosis - the certain knowledge of experience - eg love isn't true or false it just IS. > > > [Krimel follow-up to follow-up] > If it is we who are injecting meaning into the > universe and we seem to be > injecting more and more of it all the time; doesn't > that suggest a bottom-up > evolutionary progression? > > gav, follow-up: that suggests a habit. evolution > progresses towards states > with higher degrees of freedom. > > Krimel > Wouldn't it be more accurate to say the evolution > progresses when degrees of > freedom are limited? With out a restriction on > degrees of freedom there are > no patterns at all. > gav: life finds a way. yes life requires both the static and dynamic, eg pirsig's DNA analogy. > > > 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/ > Make the switch to the world's best email. Get the new Yahoo!7 Mail now. www.yahoo7.com.au/worldsbestemail 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/
