[Ham]
First, let's dispense with the precept of "always", since assigning duration
is a function of intellection, not reality.  From the perspective of Essence
evolution is a fait accompli.  Accordingly, everything I explain in this
elaboration is described in the present tense.

[Krimel]
I am unable to comment on the bulk of what you said because it just flat
makes no sense at all to me. But I believe I do understand the statement
above. I suspect the rest of what you say does not flow directly from the
statement above although I suspect it is fundamental to your notion of
Essence as 'absolute'.

You say, "From the perspective of Essence evolution is a fait accompli." I
take this to mean from some Godlike perspective time is static and that we
only perceive its directional flow by virtue of being the kind of critters
that we are.

If this is indeed what you mean then I must point out that the statement is
false. This was the kind of universe that Laplace envisioned and everything
we have learned since demonstrates that it is just not so. The future is not
determined even from God's perspective. History can not be rewound or played
forward. Because of indeterminacy if we rewind we can never see the same
point we began at originally. If we fast forward, history never ends the
same way twice.

This is the kind of utterly baseless premise that renders your "therefores"
insensible and negates their essence of other aware-beings.

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