Hey, Platt --
> Hard for me to believe that the universe didn't exist before > we humans arrived on the scene . . . if that's what you mean. The universe "comes through" man, is intelligently conceptualized by man, and is valued by man as his being in the world. There is no metaphysical distinction between "internal" and "external" reality. Man the creature is a being, just as is the table you sit at or the house you see next door. The only thing that separates these objects is your conscious experience which, with the help of your intellect, constructs these differentiated images from your sense of value. Because experienced things have value for us, we perceive them as representative values. Didn't Pirsig somewhere say experience creates the world? I do know he said that what we don't value doesn't exist. This is either a euphemism or a truth. If it's true, what exists is what we intellectualize from value as being, The universe exists by the same principle. I maintain that you folks--apparently "you people" isn't politically correct--have it all backwards. As is typical of existentialists, you are persuaded that "existence precedes essence," that things (matter, being) give rise to experience (awareness), whereas the opposite is true. How else can you explain that Reality is derived from Quality? If Quality (i.e., Value) is our pre-intellectual sensibility, as Pirsig says, than what we intellectualize as a physical world is constructed of Value, not the other way around. > I for one am no fan of the "oops" theory of creation. I lean toward > the "Ethical Requirement" theory expounded by the Canadian > philosopher John Leslie as described in "The Mind of God" by Paul > Davies. Leslie's theory seems to complement Pirsig's MOQ wherein > the thrust towards "betterness" solves many mysteries how and why > there are "firsts" followed by others. I am not acquainted with Leslie, but "firsts" and "lasts", as I've said from the beginning, are man's mode of experience. Ethical, to me, is just another variant of morality--a judgment of man. Time and space are part of the cosmic pattern that is actualized when awareness is separated from beingness. The phrase "Mind of God" suggests the same dualism implied by "mind of man". The difference is that while man can be "mindless", we can not assume that God is subject to this anthropic condition. > My cat whose descendants were probably around long before mine > show every evidence of judging things as "valuable," from the food in > his dish to the blanket in his bed. In fact I maintain (along with Pirsig) > that "value" is recognized and acting upon accordingly by every entity > known, including cats, bugs, cells, and atoms. Ah yes, that remarkable feline. Again, your "evidence" is behavior. You know, Platt, the Japanese are designing robots that not only can clean the home but converse and even make love to the owner. The manufacturers seriously believe they can market these humanoids to "lonely" or unsociable people, and they're probably right. I'm reminded of this AI creation every time I read these posts about man being a byproduct of competing inorganic/organic/social/intellectual levels. To accept this ideology is to denigrate proprietary awareness, without which agent there would be no value, quality, experience, or world. > I find "value-sensibility" the essence not just of man, > but of the universe including man. Yes, I know. And I can't seem to dissuade you from this 'Mother Earth' notion. Just be careful to watch where you step. You'll surely be destroying innocent atoms, if not also a few microbes who value your blood cells quite highly ;-). Cheers, 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/
