Krimel, My main question is what makes the self me as opposed to anyone else. All this process definition is great to describe how the self exists, but it avoids the intensely personal aspect of it.
It doesn't matter to me whether it exists or not. What is it about the self that makes it mine. Willblake2 On May 28, 2009, at 11:57:03 AM, "X Acto" <[email protected]> wrote: Krimel, Per the majority of the recent conversations, I'd say most here would agree, with the exception of ole Hammy. -Ron When I gaze at my own navel, I often simply pick the lint out of it. ________________________________ From: Krimel <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2009 2:28:03 PM Subject: [MD] The Self? Andre and All, I think as all have noted that the concept of self is problematic but I also think it is important to identify what the problem is. Part of the problems is, regarding the self as a thing rather than as a process; or to see it as discrete rather than continuous. It is pretty obvious that Self is not a primary metaphysical concept. 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. That is, they only seem metaphysical when viewed from the inside when we ask where we came from. 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. 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 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. Willblake2's question highlights the problem with the assumption of no-self or with the idea of universal consciousness or metaphysical oneness. Why indeed don't I see what you see or remember what you do? There are distinctions between here and there, me and you. One view of the Self is that it is the accumulation of memories and experience that have occurred at this particular locus and as Pirsig notes they are different here than there. We may have similar tools of perception but we use them from different points of view. But "I" am not a thing "I" am the accumulations of remembered experiences and the patterns and processes that lead to their accumulation. 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. We begin by not distinguishing between what we know and what others know or between what we prefer and what others prefer. An understanding of the Self as both similar to and different from others grows with us as we mature. It is a product of both inborn propensities and specific interactions with the environment. In short I think it is worthwhile to discuss different views of the Self and talk about what particular views mean and imply; or to talk about whatever metaphysical implications we see in various concepts of a Self. But to claim it doesn't exist or that you and I do not exist? That seem like the kind of Aw Gi moment that comes from too much pie. Krimel ----------------------------- Andre: Hi Willblake , are you serious or are you being facetious? Willblake2 Perhaps I am displaying the my simplicity, but if individual consciousness does not exist, what is the I that is seeing though my eyes? Andre: Perhaps we have all been hynotised into thinking that there is an 'I' Willblake2. Pirsig suggests that the confusion lies in the language we have inherited: "This Cartesian 'Me' this autonomous little homunculus who sits behind our eyeballs looking out through them in order to pass judgement on the affairs of the world. This self-appointed little editor of reality is just an impossible fiction that collapses the moment one examines it. This Cartesian 'Me' is a soft-ware reality, not a hardware reality'. This body on the left and this body on the right are running variations of the same program...(Lila p 204). This last sentence sums it up for me. We are simply variations of the same program and the whole 'program' consists of static patterns of value and so are 'we'. These variations have come about through the different sets of analogues we use to interpret Quality cognitively whilst the primary reality is the same for all of us. And even our analogies are not, stricktly speaking our own...they are all from these boxcars making up the train. It seems to me, Willblake2, that we have built up a cult of the individual which serves religious, socio/political and economic ends but as I have tried to suggest a few times, the REAL differences between individuals are negligible. We all drink from the mythos and have built society, gods, dogma's, logic etc etc. Within a cult of individualsm you can blame the other for all the things that go wrong endlessly dividing, slicing, cutting up all that is whole and has been whole from the beginning. That is the mess we are in and stay in because we do not assume any responsibility for it. Taking responsibility for this yourself and not leave it up to your neighbour, Obama, Hu Jintao or your mother-in law. It starts within your heart, head and through your hands as a representative of these patterns of quality. I think the 'I', the unique 'I' does not exist. I am interested in your views on this Willblake2 (following on from Bo, can you change your name? This sounds like talking with a computer program!!) Cheers Andre 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/ 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/ 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/ 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/
