Hi Bo --


This is the old "bone". You consider Man (we allow a bit political
incorrectness) as existence's rock bottom (why I compare you with
Phaedrus) I understand you perfectly. To say that there's anything
outside Man is futile, but therefore it must be suspended   ......OR a
Man metaphysics (MOM) constructed in the same manner as the
MOQ with the same Absolute/Differentiated  divide and differentiated
levels.

I consider Man (being-aware) as the creator of "things". The "anything outside Man" is the "bone". Only by suspending this existential bone can we realize that a relational system of objects and events emerging spontaneously in space/time is not ultimate reality. Its infinite regression of prior causes is a logical absurdity. Appearance and reality are two very different entities.

[Ham, previously]:
Was it not intellect (on man's part) that enabled him to
theorize a value-centered reality?  I find it incredible that
anyone can consider intellect an impediment to metaphysical
understanding.

[Bo]:
Right, this point is watertight from the premises of Man gazing out on
a World that he theorizes about. This is SOM and its "intellect" is the
theorizing.  But MOQ's intellectual LEVEL is the VALUE of this
Man/World distinction. ...

Man's intellect DOES the theorizing, and the ability to intellectualize does have value, particularly when theories can be applied to improving our life experience. Value is the psycho-emotional realization of the relative worth, goodness, truth, or beauty of something experienced. But defining a human capability or a value as a "level of quality" doesn't help us understand reality. It doesn't explain the epistemology of the observer, the nature of existence, or the metaphysics of phenomena.

Because it isn't indigenous to existence, there was a time
before it (social) that didn't know it, and a biological level
before it that even less ...etc. (these levels constitute our existence,
but I speak about the time when they were leading edge)

Once the above is grasped, namely that the Man/World dichotomy
is a static stage that we are hypnotized by into believing is how reality
really IS, after that cales [?] fall ..etc.

I have read the rest, but this is the crux and without settling it we just
talk past each other.

You speak in historical metaphors that I don't comprehend. Let's get to the crux of the matter.

If you cannot accept the fact that intellect is indigenous to man (which would make it "indigenous to existence"), I've lost you. You seem to imply that the ability to reason, compare, extrapolate, analyze, and conceptualize is (was) an evolutionary development of our species. I won't contest that, but I don't see what it has to do with philosophy or metaphysics. Why not focus on what man is NOW, in the world you and I live in.

Let's assume modern man is a "fully developed" species. What is this mystical "leading edge" of intellect that so intrigues you? Is it Archimedes shouting: "Eureka! - I have found it!" when he discovered the principle of a lever to move the world? Had he reached the "leading edge" of what you call the Intellectual Level? Are you saying that all the principles, equations, laws, and hypotheses that Man has constructed to define the natural world exist eternally at some extracorporal level? That they are not part of man's reasoning process?

You can lombast me all you want, but I'd really appreciate your candor here.

Thanks, Bo
--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