On 2/15/08 12:25 PM, "Joseph Maurer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tuesday 12 February 2008 11:46 PM Ham writes to Joe: > > >> Ham, evolution is not a word you like. Does that mean it is >unreal? If I >> speak in terms of destruction, and I say >³throwing the baby out with the >> bathwater² I don¹t like that >> very much. But it can happen! The baby ³social system² should >not be >> irrelevant. > > [Ham] > I accept evolution as process or change in time, which is the mode of human > experience. I do not view it as a metaphysical principle, however, because in > the perspective of an immutable Essence there is no change. > > [Joe] > Since I have to look at what I experience to explore a metaphysics to describe > it, I assume that metaphysics is a part of an inner conscious experience. An > immutable essence¹ is not part of my inner or outer experience, and I would > have to appeal to my Faith as a third level of experience. It is my Faith and > unfortunately I cannot communicate it to another except in dogmatic terms. In > My Opinion dogmatic terms bypass the intellect, dismissing its validity. The > words used to express dogma are only analogies for what the person believes. > What is the difference between analogies¹ and the mode of human experience¹? > > > [Ham] > The point of your "throwing the baby out with the bathwater" analogy escapes > me. I've used this expression in connection with the post-modern tendency to > trash every idea that has gone before, particularly any theory that is tainted > with spirituality or a transcendent source. > > [Joe] > I was only trying to point out that analogies are useful for communication > even at a metaphysical level as the inner person has at least some sense of > what is being said. The metaphor of an ³immutable essence² does not ring a > bell in me. > > [Ham] > Presumably, you mean that a society develops and matures in the same way that > an individual does, that history is important to both. Evolution is a > principle of nature that has special interest to the historian, > anthropologist, or biologist, but I don't see it as essential to a philosophy > whose primary focus is the nature of man's reality. That existence is a > system in which everything experienced is in transition is a given. But it is > the end goal that we aspire to, and value has that end as > its object. > > [Joe] > Metaphysics cannot be contradictory to other intellectual disciplines. I do > not see that ³immutable essence² supports these disciplines except as a given. > For myself I accept other givens like ³levels² in ³laws of order² and ³laws of > manifestation² in describing consciousness. Your ontology ³Essence, > nothingness, existence² is like a ³law of manifestation². > > [Ham] > You say that the "baby social system" should not be irrelevant. Perhaps not. > But to argue endlessly over whether intellect began with the caveman, the > ancient Greeks, or the Enlightenment sheds little light on how we create our > reality and what role values play in human experience. Again, I accept the > fact that individuals interact socially, communicate collectively, and work > toward common goals. > > [Joe] > I agree. > > [Ham] > But I don't agree that the ability to think and form concepts is derived from > language or is dependent on some extracorporeal realm called the social or > intellectual level. Thoughts and ideas are the products of individual minds, > and verification by consensus would be meaningless if there were no ideas to > verify. > > [Joe] > I don¹t agree that ³individual minds² are found in the soul part of a > body-soul division based on a division of existence into an intentional and > real existence, the subjective without value, objective view of Aristotle. > >> IMO the Osocial system¹ is created when an individual >perceives that the >> anguish of emptiness found in proprietary >awareness (consciousness) is quite >> unbearable. Only that >hunger for celebrity can lead to SOL, the intellectual >> entity >of law. > > [Ham] > Forgive my ignorance, Joe, but I don't what what an "Osocial system" is and > don't recall seeing it in Pirsig's writings. > > [Joe] > ³Osocial² occurs when the mail program edits the word document and changes > highlighting techniques. I see your quotation marks came through just fine so > I will try to use them to highlight something. ³social system² is what I > wrote. > > > [Ham] > Since proprietary awareness is the only awareness we possess, if it is > "empty", the possessor must either be asleep or not fully conscious. > > [Joe] > IMO evolution to the social level is the value of proprietary awareness. I > try to imagine my chagrin of being aware of my inner-outer self, yet > completely unaware of my companion in the same way. I conclude how empty I > would feel in that circumstance, > > [Ham] > I'm also completely mystified by your last statement. "Hunger for celebrity" > leads to intellectual understanding? I guess that explains why the younger > generation seeks the advice of rock singers and movie stars on what > politicians to vote for. > > [Joe] > I was using Pirsig¹s insight into ³celebrity² as a dynamic movement in the > social level to argue for ³celebrity² as the need or hunger for movement to a > new level, SOL. > > Regards, > Ham > > > > Regards > > Joe > > > > On 2/12/08 11:44 PM, "Ham Priday" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Greetings, Joseph -- >> >> >>> Ham, evolution is not a word you like. Does that mean it is unreal? >>> If I speak in terms of destruction, and I say ³throwing the baby out >>> with the bathwater² I don¹t like that very much. But it can happen! >>> The baby ³social system² should not be irrelevant. >> >> I accept evolution as process or change in time, which is the mode of human >> experience. I do not view it as a metaphysical principle, however, because >> in the perspective of an immutable Essence there is no change. The point of >> your "throwing the baby out with the bathwater" analogy escapes me. I've >> used this expression in connection with the post-modern tendency to trash >> every idea that has gone before, particularly any theory that is tainted >> with spirituality or a transcendent source. >> >> Presumably, you mean that a society develops and matures in the same way >> that an individual does, that history is important to both. Evolution is a >> principle of nature that has special interest to the historian, >> anthropologist, or biologist, but I don't see it as essential to a >> philosophy whose primary focus is the nature of man's reality. That >> existence is a system in which everything experienced is in transition is a >> given. But it is the end goal that we aspire to, and value has that end as >> its object. >> >> You say that the "baby social system" should not be irrelevant. Perhaps >> not. But to argue >> endlessly over whether intellect began with the caveman, the ancient Greeks, >> or the Enlightenment sheds little light on how we create our reality and >> what role values play in human experience. Again, I accept the fact that >> individuals interact socially, communicate collectively, and work toward >> common goals. But I don't agree that the ability to think and form concepts >> is derived from language or is dependent on some extracorporeal realm called >> the social or intellectual level. Thoughts and ideas are the products of >> individual minds, and verification by consensus would be meaningless if >> there were no ideas to verify. >> >>> IMO the Osocial system¹ is created when an individual perceives >>> that the anguish of emptiness found in proprietary awareness >>> (consciousness) is quite unbearable. Only that hunger for celebrity >>> can lead to SOL, the intellectual entity of law. >> >> Forgive my ignorance, Joe, but I don't what what an "Osocial system" is and >> don't recall seeing it in Pirsig's writings. Since proprietary awareness is >> the only awareness we possess, if it is "empty", the possessor must either >> be asleep or not fully conscious. I'm also completely mystified by your >> last statement. "Hunger for celebrity" leads to intellectual understanding? >> I guess that explains why the younger generation seeks the advice of rock >> singers and movie stars on what politicians to vote for. >> >> Regards, >> Ham >> >> 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/
