Hi Ron --


Is X Acto now your avatar?

Parmenides in his arguements about the non existence of voids
or "nothing" turned the verb "to be" into a substantive form.
He argued that the concept of “nothing” does not exist therefore
movement or change is an illusion because it required movement
within a “void” rationalizing that "be-ing" or "is" is timeless and
unchanging and whole.  The reality of the world is one being.

I have argued that 'beingness' is the intellectual precept of differentiated otherness. The experienced world, and all phenomena within it, is perceived as being because the human existent that perceives is a "being-aware". Lest there be any doubt, I maintain that there is a difference between existence (the experienced world) and absolute reality. Ultimate reality is not defined by either SOM or MOQ. It is not subject or object, relations or difference, but is the "potentiality for difference" whereby the value of negated otherness (being) is realized.

Parmenides claimed that truth may not be known via perception
that it may only be known by reason. What Parmenides does not
consider is that Reason is ta endoxa, and therefore a product of
language and culture.

Your sophistry is amazing! It forced me to look up 'ta endoxa' which, according to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy means "accepted things" or "accepted opinions". I take this term to be the logical equivalent of "a given" (e.g., a proposition or premise that is universally accepted as stated). If that's correct, I don't see why a ta endoxa statement is any more a "product of language or culture" than any other statement.

All my literature maintains what we today know as classical
essentialism is attributed to Plato, what Plato was arguing in his
idealism is that "entities" or "forms" are an abstraction divorced
from the physical world. Despite the fact Plato taught that ideas
are ultimately real, and different from non-ideal things--indeed,
he argued for a distinction between the ideal and non-ideal realm.
Between the abstract universal and the concrete particular.
The difference is that Plato founded his idealism on the assumption
of "essentialism".

By Plato insisting on making the distinction between "appearance
and reality" he re-enforced the notion of "forms" as eternal and
unchanging wholes or"entities" which we find again are ta endoxa,
and therefore a product of language and culture or the "universal".

Yes, I was somewhat surprised to see this label applied to Plato in my Internet searches. But that he distinguished the "ideal abstract" from the "non-ideal concrete" is not the point, since even his universals ("essences") are differentiated. Being is differentiated, Consciousness is differentiated, and so is Pirsig's Quality. Everything in existence implies cause-and-effect, change, and relations. Considered logically, experiential existence is an infinite regression. Only an absolute source with the potential to negate otherness can resolve the paradox.

Plancks constant and the observable symetry of particals
dissolves notions of observer relativity in quantum mechanics.
Quantum physics is indeed still based in human sensibility,
but that sensibility is cross-referenced with mathematical
calculation. They each verify the other. I think you and
Parmenides share much in common, although your ideas
of a value-centic experience is much more viable than
anything we have of record of Parmenides work, IMHO.

It was not my intent to conflagulate essentialism and Platonic
idealism, but I do think I have a case in the origin of essentialistic
concepts.

I'll accept the label along with your compliment, Ron, despite the renunciation of Parmenide's theory that change is illusory. But can you accept my concept of Absolute Essence, even if we disagree on how difference is derived from it?

Thanks, Ron.  Great to talk with you again.

Essentially yours,
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/

Reply via email to