Hello Arlo --
> So let me see if I understand this, Ham. > > At some instance in the past, "man" spontaneously > came into being in more-or-less the form he is today. > At this moment, man's consciousness "created" the universe. > > If we can forgo (for the moment) the details, would you say > that this is more-or-less correct? If not, can you correct it > and provide me with a similarly short and succinct synopsis > of your ideas on this? "Spontaneously" implies independently or unconditionally, and you must understand that I consider existence both conditional and relational. I let the anthropologists decide how Homo sapiens evolved as a distinct species, and to what extent early man differed organically from modern man. It isn't my purpose or expertise to quarrel with evolutionist theory. Scientists study the world objectively, as an unfolding process in time and space. They regard time as a physical aspect of the relational universe, and include it as such in their relativity equations. Unlike scientists and historians, philosophers are free to come up with theories that are inconsistent with physical principles, especially those embracing the subjective element which is inimical to the scientific paradigm. Along with other philosophers, I regard space/time as defining the mode of experience rather than an attribute of objective reality. So that, for me, time has relevance only to my experience of the world. And since that takes place "now", I consider creation to be a moment-to-moment occurrence. Each experience creates a "reality of the moment". But while the order and configuration of that reality "comes through me", my experience doesn't "invent" it; it merely provides a proprietary conception of it which is different from the conception of anyone else. Since we are all connected by value to the same essential source, we are all observing the same universe, albeit experiencing it differently. This affords the universality of knowledge by which we can describe our experience and communicate effectively with others. An analogy might be the Internet which provides a working web in which millions of users can share their private thoughts and ideas, yet no two of them are having identical experiences. As Pirsig suggests, Quality (i.e., Value) equals Reality. I take his Reality to mean my "existence". Value is sensed pre-intellectually, which means that it is primary to experienced phenomena. Read my last post to Platt, and see if the ideas and references quoted there rule out the hypothesis that what we experience as existence is created by how we intellectualize Value. This is a difficult concept for the western mind, Arlo, and I couldn't give you "details" even if you asked me. But thanks for presenting your query in a cordial manner. 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/
