[dmb] The MOQ (and I) take the empiricism of science to be too narrow. It is based on what we might call "sensory empiricism" and this usually means they're operating with the assumptions of SOM. The MOQ's radical empiricism rejects those assumptions and expands the notion of "experience" beyond what can be known through the five senses. It insists that all experience counts as real and rejects as unreal anything that can't be known in experience.
[Krimel] What sort of experiences do you think transcend sensory experience? What exactly comes wandering through this door you think you are opening? Ron: Dave, knowing Krimels tendencies, I would have cited emotional states in regard to physiological senses. You specifically state transcendental of the five senses of touch sight smell hearing and taste. Which is limited and does not reflect the emotional aspect of dealing with pain, anxiety, grief and the like which alter perceptions of the five basic senses. Because you know he will cite these as the origin of the mysticism you will posit. Krimel is purposely luring you into a debate he knows he will kick your ass in, the aspect that mysticism is bullshit. I would have cited the supported role of the emotional aspect as being every bit as real in experience as a chair, thus diffusing his charge of mystic mumbo jumbo being as relative as scientific data as crap. Which is frustrating to back out of once the charge is made. But you did a pretty good job of covering that sentiment. But I sense a Krimel rebuttal. no offence to the conjurer, just speeding things up a tad. 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/
