[Ron]
James stated that percept and concept feed into one another seemlessly
they compose experience. Percept encoded concept encoded precept.
They are discreet in their conceptual meanings only.
Pirsig states the same, All expereince is then composed of both aspects,
all expereince is then mystical, it is only the focus on the conceptual
frameworks which prevents one from percieving this way. The desire for
certainty in meaning blinds one to the value of meaning in the concept
of certainty.
[Krimel]
James is quite clear that concepts arise from and are subservient to
perception. That is what empiricism is, anyway you slice it. He certainly
acknowledges their interrelations but when push comes to shove perception
wins. I don't see at all how this can be reduced to mysticism.
Ron:
I tend to get the impression from James that they emerge together, empiricism
has afforded a view in which to single out and diagnose percepts, I'm not under
cutting it's advantages in this realm of understanding nor is James I believe.
Reason tells us this is so, but experience, as it pertains to the
immediate, from
babes to old age may be viewed as a development of both aspects of one
continuous process. From what I read of James, Newborns posess extremely
narrow ranges of percepts because they have an extremely narrow range of
concepts. It is questionable that they are born a tabla reza with a full range
of percepts. Symbol encoded response carries through back to single cells
and develop in complexity, as one action.
Because they are one act that may be reduced to emergence from inorganic
patterns which may be reduced further to oscillating fields of force, one may
view it as "mystical" even from a perspective of reductionism. Terming it
"desire"
is just as accurate a definition as any scientific explaination, mystics as
scientists, pull meaning from this.
[Ron]
Leaving your criticisms of mysticism the criticisms of science.
[Krimel]
All I am saying is that mysticism seems to me like a fixed focus point and
shoot. Science strikes me as an SLR with interchangeable macro, wide angle,
telephoto lenses and a choice between digital and analog formats.
Ron:
Sorry to keep bringing up Socrates, but he stated that there are two
kinds of good born of the desire of being, which I believe applies
to this discussion, I think every good mystic is a scientist and every
good scientist is a mystic. I do not think it takes much to realize
that they stem from the same sense of wonder and desire to understand.
Much in the way of percept/concept, can't have one without the other.
They indeed are corelative. To focus on one to the exclusion of the other
as empiricism has want to do in the name of primacy is only examining
one side of the coin.
________________________________
From: Krimel <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Tuesday, June 30, 2009 1:35:18 AM
Subject: Re: [MD] Reductionism
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/
