Peter, Ian, Steve (maybe),
Excuse me for butting in...
Krimel

[Peter]
Plain experience starts with the inorganic; when we touch something
molecules at the end of the finger are jiggled. Experience becomes vanilla
flavoured via the biological substrates. I suggest some experience gets
sufficiently processed at the organic level and never makes it to register
as a symbol. Sorry if my language is imprecise, I don't have specialist
knowledge of physiology, I'm just describing the way I see it now.

[Krimel]
This is a hard sell in these parts, my friend. But let me see if I can't
help flesh out your argument. The sensory nervous system is rather like
Indira's net cast over the surface of out bodies. It is equipped to
"transduce" energy from the environment into electro-chemical impulses in
our nerves. The various sensory nerves transduce different forms of energy
from the environment into very similar nervous impulses that are conveyed
along different pathways to the brain where they are processed and
integrated with previously stored experiences of like kind.

One of the problems with a notion like pure experience for example is that
if it were possible it is unlikely to be desirable. The pure experience of
any instant is composed of activation of nerves by, light and air pressure
and temperature and chemicals in the air. It is highly fragmented. There is
some processing at the organic level as you suggest, especially in the
visual system. The sense of consciousness as James would have it is a
function that describes the integration of diverse inputs into a conceptual
whole.

[Peter]
That's a neat side step Ian. So what experience have you had that you can't
explain with words? Pirsig's Dynamic Quality? Tao? We can't define it but
surely we can talk about it's effects and it's uses?

[Krimel]
Words serve only to convey information about common experiences. We have no
need for words to explain our own experiences to ourselves. Words serve
mainly as attempts to reproduce our subjective experiences in others or to
approximate the experiences of others in ourselves subjectively. The
Subject/Object split is little more that a set of labels identifying these
different subjective kinds of experience. That is immediate sensory input
and memory of previous experiences. Perception then is the active
integration of the present with the past.

[Peter]
Agreed we can by an act of will momentarily stop associating, and that's a
useful thing to do. Don't think, feel!

[Krimel]
I am not entirely sure we can do this but if we could it would be a bit like
holding our breath under water. A useful experience but of what significance
in any larger sense?

[Peter]
Again, you seem to have side stepped; what kind of thinking can we do
without symbol manipulation? I suggest mystical experience is difficult to
categorise because it rings so many bells all at once. Such an experience
surely registers in the intellect because later we feel the need to
reconsider it. But because it is such a new experience the intellect cannot
so easily file it away and the experience continues to resonate 'I'.

[Krimel]
Mystical experiences whether induced by chemicals, seizures, social pressure
or formal training alter the normal processing of sensory data. In Tibetan
monks long term meditative experiences seem to expand the processing centers
of pleasure and well being in the frontal cortex. 

LSD seems to interfere with the processing of emotional content and
filtering of sense data. When sensory input is altered either as input or as
it is being processed it certainly creates new kinds of information that
does not fit into ones current network of past associations. This new
subjective experience is thus difficult to communicate or find agreement
with others about.

[Peter]
Agreed, we can experience without rationalising but when we later discuss
our experience then it's via subjects and objects.

[Krimel]
Exactly! What I feel and what I can say about my feelings that you might
share in common.


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