Hi Ham 28 Sep. you said.:
> Personally, I don't consider "awareness of objective reality" a > "monster platypus". I consider it an accurate definition of > existence. What I meant was: Regarding SUBJECTIVE awareness as fundamentally different from an OBJECTIVE world "out there". i.e. regarding this as existence's deepest divide - then - this creates paradoxes. On the other hand, regarding the S/O (in moqspeak) as a mere static subset of the DQ/SQ, then all paradoxes disappears. So (starting all over): Is the "awareness/what it's aware of" your fundamental split? Re. Descartes (who you initially said dismissed the "self", but now admit affirmed it) > Of course he did ...but he arrived at "I think, therefore I AM" only > after ruling out everything else that he doubts about, including > himself. Sure! That's the point. > Using the MoQ hierarchy as your bible, you come to the opposite > conclusion: "Everything I experience is a pattern, therefore I am a > pattern too"! The human being an aggregate of the four quality levels (including all their "patterns". Sure, another Q tenet. > I don't know how Platt feels about this, but Descartes makes more > sense to me. Incidentally, how can you regard Descartes as > "pre-intellectual" in the historic sense, since he clearly refers to > the subject 'I' doing the thinking? I do not regard Descartes as "pre-intellectual". He was the one who brought intellect-as-SOM to a head with himself as a thinking subject aware of a world. If this is an example of your interpretation of my position ... no wonder! Bodvar 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/
