[Willblake2]
I don't think I am asking for something to be handed down from on high
because I still have not subscribed to the hierarchical notion that MoQ
seems to profess.  Once I learn more about how evolution ties in with this
concept, in a meaningful way, I may believe.

[Krimel]
I want to point out that hierarchical notions facilitate random access and
recall. We are smarter, more intellectual, when we use them and we discard
or alter them in proportion to the efficiencies that they produce.

[Willblake2]
Yes, possibly I am asking "what is".  My question is what is "knowing", and
does Quality help explain this.  How do we know, and how do we know we know,
comes later for me.  If I were to take a scientific look at it (which is
what I am most adept at), I would look in the brain (which I studied in
graduate school, and published peer reviewed papers on).  It appears that if
it is neurological, my knowing is due to very subtle chemical fluctuations.
 Sodium and potassium travel across the cell membrane in distances that have
to be measured at the angstrom level.  Neurotransmitters are released and
taken up in slightly larger spaces, but the chemical fluctuation is still
very subtle.  Is it this fluctuation that causes my knowing?  If so, then it
is no different from the earth "knowing" do to the fluctuation within this
planet.  Is the sodium ion a part of my knowing?  It is certainly part of my
brain.  Or does this knowing start when there is a critical mass of neurons,
tied up in a specific way, in my frontal cortex?  If the frontal cortex is
removed do we not know anymore?  How much of the frontal cortex needs to be
removed before we lose that knowing?  Is it memory?  If I wake up without
remembering who I am, where I am, or where I've been, is this new knowing a
different person, or is it still me?  Do I start knowing from birth?, or in
utero?  Am I the same person day to day or reborn every minute as my body
replaces chemicals in these nerve cells?  I tend to believe there is some
continuity to this knowing, but I cannot prove it without having an idea of
what I'm proving.

[Krimel]
In my view the chief distinction between science and philosophy is that
philosophy becomes science when techniques are developed to resolve a set of
philosophical disputes. All sciences began as philosophy. What is left over
as philosophy is that which can't be decided by other means. Psychology and
the neurosciences are developing techniques for asking the questions of
epistemology, how we know. This is a science that is only about 100 years
old. Almost all of the contributions from neuroscience are less that 30
years old. What I have said repeatedly here is that without some
understanding of what has been agreed upon about knowing and how we know,
philosophy is just hot air.

It is not as though my "knowing" can be reduced to organic chemistry. But
without some appreciation of organic chemistry how can I claim to know
anything about knowing? Organic chemistry is necessary for my knowing but
not sufficient to explain it. That is what science seeks after: what is
necessary. 

You and I are processes that seem to be continuous across time. We are
processes that can reflect and recall experiences across time. The dynamic
quality of this ongoing process of you and I depends on the static quality
of the processes the give rise to us. Understanding those static process is
critical to understanding the dynamic quality that emerges from them.

[Willblake2]
Experiences I have had led me to believe that my knowing is in that sodium
atom, and in the nerve cell, and in the dynamic subtle flow of chemicals,
and in my whole body and the way it interacts with the environment, and in
the cloths I wear, and the food that I eat, and in the people I meet, and in
the planet where I live, and...  My knowing is all tied up in all of that
completely, because I am all those things, I create all those things.  I
don't know how I do it, whether I control them, or am trying to learn how
to.  My knowing cannot be isolated to one single thing in this body, it is
everything.  I don't just think about Quality, I am Quality.

[Krimel]
Exactly, and our inability to specify exactly what that Quality is and what
it will become is what makes it undefined.





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