On 20 May 2009 at 18:37, John Carl wrote: > breaking in on Platt and Ham... > [Platt] > > That sounds a lot more like you than me. I have stated a number of > > times that I don't subscribe to philosophical idealism. Static patterns > > exist whether I personally experience them or not. > > > [John] > > Hi Platt. I've been reading Royce. He is called an Absolute Idealist. Is > that different from a philosophical one? Because what you describe here > below sounds to me exactly like what Royce terms Absolute Thought.
Hey John: Does Royce argue as a classical Idealist does that a chicken doesn't lay an egg unless and until somebody observes it? > [Platt] > > > You assume there is such a pattern as "conscious locus." To me > > consciousness is awareness is experience is Quality and is everywhere > > all at once. I merely tap into it as does my cat, UTOE, and all other > > creatures, great and small. > > > [John] > > That is Royce's description of Absolute Thought. Great minds always reach the same conclusions. :-) > Also, I was thinking today about a question posed to me by my first > philosophy teacher which was "how do you know a rock doesn't posses > consciousness?" A consciousness too slow and ponderous for us to understand > perhaps, but its own nevertheless. I thought that was a good question. > Platt, when you say all creatures great and small, does your MoQ allow for > consciousness below the biological level? Yes. To quote Pirsig: "I think the answer is that inorganic objects experience events but do not react to them biologically, socially or intellectually. They react to these experiences inorganically, according to the laws of physics." (LS, Note 30.) > [Ham] > > > As I've said before, the evolutionary hierarchy is flawed on two counts. > It > > > > assumes that value (quality) exists independently of sensibility, and it > > > denies subjectivity > > > > > [Platt] > > > > It denies subjectivity but doesn't say Quality exists independently of > > sensibility/experience. Rather, it is sensibility/experience. > > [John] > > When I first read this, thinking the concepts through, it seemed to me that > Ham's problem was one of hierarchical dominance in the role of > Quality/experience. Is that at the crux of the problem Ham? You believe > values arise from experience and are subordinate to it, and Platt, along > with Pirsig, believe that sensibility (human) arises in reaction to value > (super-human)? > > Which is why it seems to Ham from his viewpoint, epistemologically unsound > and all that. > > Epistemologically. Cool. I gotta start using terms like that more often. I hope you don't. Such words tend to confuse rather than clarify, impressing the writer more than edifying the reader. > [Platt] > > > Likewise. But I don't see that we're really so far apart. Your Essence is > > my Quality. The only difference is you don't see Quality happening until > > humans came along. But I see Quality always there, like Essence. > > > [John] > > So the conflict is over hierarchical dominance. And Platt, you really are > agreeing with Royce, the champion of idealism. Well, you know, great minds . . .:-) > [Platt] > > But just so there's no misunderstanding. Pirsig said the subject-object > > > division you champion is a high-quality intellectual pattern. It's just > > that > > he thinks, for the reasons he cites in Lila, the Dynamic-static Quality is > > better. I agree. But I could be wrong, he could be wrong, you could be > > wrong, we all could be wrong. Which is why I took up painting. No one > > can say that my painting is wrong. All one can say is, "I know what I > > like." > > > > [John] > > What I like is that yin/yang symbol which pictographically represents so > well the dynamic/static or subject/object dichotomous thought that we humans > lean toward, without getting caught up in linguistic ego traps that we > humans fall into. > > Bring on the the zen, I say. And bring on the art, Platt. I have suggested to Horse, the moderator and preserver of this site, that he make a space where contributors can display their art. If that becomes available, just wait until you see some of Bo's paintings. They are museum quality, shinning with DQ! Platt 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/
