David --
Ham said:
There remains, however, the question: What IS the cause of Value?
dmb says:
When someone answers that, I'll ask about the cause of
the cause of value. Then somebody can ask about the
cause of the cause of the cause of value. And so on, forever.
Just as in the case of theology's "prime mover" or "first cause",
it's a goofy, goofy fake problem.
It is a "goofy fake problem" only for those who cannot see their way out of
the fallacy of infinite regression. Since they have no answer to "What
caused the Big Bang?" or "What created Consciousness?", they refuse to
regard the concept of a primary cause as valid. And so it remains a
metaphysical problem.
Empirical reality is understood as a cause-and-effect system, the "effects"
seen as a series of events occurring in time. This presumes that dimensions
like time and space are fundamental to reality, rather than the relational
mode of finite experience. Yet experience has to be the impediment in our
understanding, as logic does not support the view that the first instance of
anything is "uncaused". It is man's intellectual bias, not logic, which
rejects the idea of a "first cause" because it's associated with theology.
When we free ourselves from religious bias and adversity to metaphysics, it
becomes clear that everything in existence is a "creation", and that
phenomena which have no causal explanation can only be accounted for by an
"uncreated source" that is not limited by existential conditions such as
time, space, and evolution. Regrettably, despite all their talk about the
short-sightedness of SOM thinking, MoQ's author and his followers are
unwilling to seek understanding beyond finitude.
Essentially speaking,
Ham
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/
