For Ron (who has found that being "unruly" is the only way to get attention)
30 Sep.: Ron to Andre: > I think E=Mc2 pretty much proved that objective reality is an > illusion, Andre: > Ron, I just want to check something with you: when you use the word > 'illusion' do you mean to say that our knowledge of the world/universe > is still incomplete or that it doesn't exist i.e a figment of our > imagination without value? Ron: > Great question, when I use the term illusion, I mean a distortion not > a hallucenation. I mean to say that Philosphic idealism is mostly > concerned with the idea that all we may ever grasp of experience is a > distortion of it. A simplification an exaggeration. Simply put, > objects are an idea projected onto experience, an assumption, one we > were taught most of our lives. I cannot see that "philosophic idealism" says anything else than "normal idealism", namely that (in Andre's words) "our world/universe is a figment of our imagination" and is SOM's subjective part. Why are you laboring inside SOM's premises believing that the MOQ is some subjectivist or spiritual movement? Which it isn't! "Objects are an idea" ... what utter nonsense. In a MOQ context subjects and objects - better the S/O distinction - is the intellectual levels repertoire; An immense value but due to its static nature it will lead to paradoxes if treated as existence's fundament. Write that hundred times on your blackboard!!!! Ron: There are two quotes from Lila chpter 4 which shed some light on the view you have: "Margaret Mead said, 'He feared premature generalization like the plague, and continually warned us against it.' Generalization should be based on the facts and only on the facts. 'It is indubitable that science was his religion,' Kroeber said. 'He called his early convictions materialistic. Science could tolerate nothing "subjective"; value judgments — and by infection even values considered as phenomena - must be absolutely excluded.'" "By the time Phaedrus finished reading about Boas he was confident he'd identified the source of the immune system he was up against, the same immune system that had so rejected Dusenberry's views. It was classical nineteenth-century science and its insistence that science is only a method for determining what is true and not a body of beliefs in itself. There have been many schools of anthropological theory other than Boas' but Phaedrus could find none that opposed him on the matter of scientific objectivity." Ron: I think you'll find that you are trapped in the immune systems way of thinking. Your response: "Objects are an idea" ... what utter nonsense." says it all. This is the hurdle you have never been able to get over. It exposes the SOL for what it is. A scientifically objective interpretation. Your view " tolerates nothing "subjective"; value judgments — and by infection even values considered as phenomena - must be absolutely excluded.'" The problem, you see is that when you consider subjectivism as "our world/universe is a figment of our imagination" You are misunderstanding the position. Modern physics has found that "objective reality" does not exist as we commonly percieve it to be. That what we actually are and experience is composed of complex interdependant" fields of force" which is a polite way of saying "we have no idea what it is" it's mostly vast empty space, but space seems to composed of force too. So what that means is that our common view of things our "metaphysical" assumptions are just that....assumptions. TIME and SPACE are RELATIVE to the OBSERVER. IE. TIME and SPACE are subjective. Objects are subjective interpretations of experience. Well shit! that leaves science in a pretty fine mess! Wait, there are a few people who have considered the matter! What we subjectivly interpret depends on what we value. And what we value is based largely on experience (which we have found we can not completely and absolutely understand based on what we have found) because....drumrole...it's dynamic and everchanging!. It may not be defined because it can't be defined. All we can ever do with our limited viewpoint is struggle to comprehend it by creating simplistic, limited, exaggerated concepts (static quality). And if you say this is nonsense...then you are about 100 yrs behind the times and are part of the immune system. 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/
