[Tittivulus]
> In considering something as complex as a music
> experience we might be well advised if we follow the
> approach of Bios; not just 'analyzing' and looking
> for what 'parts' it may be made-of , but looking for
> 'components' selected on the basis of 'what they do'
> to other components and their role in the whole
> (functionalism?). I'd be the last one to deny that
> it is useful for understanding experiences to learn
> that they are made of cognitive and emotional parts.
> But the real challenge lies in finding out how do
> both 'interrelate' (to use Marha's words), how do
> they affect each other and, if they malfunction,
> like a faulty carburetor, how does that affect the
> overall experience.
> Furthermore, if we consider the said music
> experience under the analogy of a jigsaw puzzle, we
> might be ill advised if we separate the pieces in
> two lots: in one lot those that may labeled
> subjective and in the other the ones that may be
> labeled objective,(the S/O distinction). The same
> holds for the two lots, intellectual and corporeal;
> much better, IMHO, to separate them in lots
> according to their function or role in the overall
> experience and, even better, not to separate them at
> all, but to try to locate them in the original
> jigsaw picture and see if we can find out how they
> contribute to the picture.
Exactly! I've tried this before. This is what I
mean by 'woods'. The woods are an experience that
includes me, my wife, the deer, my son, cities,
woodpeckers - it is the ecosystem approach. Some took
this as raw biological, but I notice wits, I notice
intellect working in the woods. When I walk in the
woods, I don't leave my intellect at the house. I
bring it with me. How does intellect relate to the
woods? This is an original question of life. How
does any component relate to anything? I'm glad this
is being brought back up. Thanks Marsha and
Tittivulus for keeping this pattern going.
Ok, so what they do. The s/o experience seems
flat to me. This is why I've had difficulty with s/o.
What difference is an s/o experience from walking in
the woods? Call it what you want to, but I don't see
s/o as an impact at all on how we understand reality.
For s and o are interchangeable. So, reality is more
specific and has information to share if we mention a
worm and the holes the worms dig. This is also why
I've said before that I don't see s's and o's dancing
about. What information are s's and o's sharing?
I've say nothing. It is the further inquiry into a
rock and noticing atoms that shares more information,
or discussing how one sat on a hill and watched the
sunset, or even if one wants to discuss how they read
a book and the information the book shared, or doing a
math problem, etc... These experiences are
interrelating with our growth as human beings, the
earth, and the Amazon rainforest. What comes of these
components and what are they doing?
thanks.
woods,
SA
____________________________________________________________________________________
Looking for last minute shopping deals?
Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping
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/
