On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 11:28 AM, Krimel <[email protected]> wrote: > > > It is pretty obvious that Self is not a primary metaphysical concept.
[John Aghast] Huh? You can't have a metaphysic without a self to make one. What are you talking about? [Krimel] > Selves, whatever they are or however we conceive of them can only be seen > as > metaphysical constructs from a purely phenomenological or self centered > point of view. [John] Sounds like selves are primary metaphysical concepts then. I mean, for most people anyway. [Krimel] > That is, they only seem metaphysical when viewed from the > inside when we ask where we came from. [John] But I thought that was what metaphysics was, looking from the inside and asking where we came from. [Krimel] > But I think one of the key flaws in > Pirsig's version of SOM is to focus on this particular version of the > Mind/Body problem. [John] Yeah? I never quite got the mind body problem myself. What problem? I gotta body, I don't mind. [Krimel] > And so the problem becomes about self versus other or > subjective versus objective. This diverts attention from the more > fundamental problems of whether knowledge arises from our senses or from > our > thoughts [John] and whether there is any difference [Krimel] > or whether physical substance (extension) is metaphysically > different from mental substance (non-extension). There are many ways to > talk > about a self that do not appeal to any particular metaphysical assumptions > at all. [John] Well if I was john the arguer instead of john the dialoguer, I'd probably challenge you to name one. But I'm wondering if maybe there is some confusion about the term metaphysic. I thought it meant that branch of philosophy that deals with primary reality but you seem to use it like a modifier for physic as in physical as in "above and beyond physical". SUPERphysical like some sorta superpower or something. Maybe that's why I'm confused. [Krimel] Willblake2's question highlights the problem with the assumption of no-self [John] yeah you got that right. I see no hope at all for any assumption - or conclusion for that matter - of no self. Why bother? [Krimel] > > or with the idea of universal consciousness or metaphysical oneness. Why > indeed don't I see what you see or remember what you do? [John] Well here is where I think it gets interesting. Its not your fault, its mine. If I could rhetorically convey my reality more clearly, then you could see it. And maybe not perfectly, but enough to identify and relate to each other as fellows. We humans can accomplish this. I've seen it. [Krimel] > There are > distinctions between here and there, me and you. [John] Yeah. All those "qualities" we're always observing but I can't get a straight answer on even when I beg. Must be one of them koan thingies. [Krimel] One view of the Self is > that it is the accumulation of memories and experience that have occurred > at > this particular locus [John] You know I had a very strong thought-process today which was what if I met somebody in my life who has read all the exact same books as me. In the same order and context. Because a lot of what I feel is unique about my I, is my eclectic reading. My biggest bummer is I don't hardly know anybody who has read even close to the same books as my I and so I talk to myself a lot. (probably am right now for that matter) [Krimel] It is also important to note that children's understanding develops and > changes over time and that children regardless of culture follow a similar > developmental path. [John] That's a fascinating topic to me. I felt fortunate to have lots of kids. Each one starts out a blank slate, from the same starting point pretty much as every human that ever lived, and they develop differences and nuances so quickly. But you're right, there is this similar path upon which the differences are expressed. It's like, ok, how is THIS daughter gonna handle puberty. In her own unique way while trodding the same old path. ------------ It's ALL good... ------------ 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/
