Hi Ham,
Thanks for the feedback.  You are right, I am dwelling on this.  I will check
your website again.  I think I can see how you may extrapolate your ontology
to cover subjective valuation, but I'll read a bit before I disturb you again.
Cheers,
Mark

On Dec 12, 2009, at 1:12:35 AM, "Ham Priday" <[email protected]> wrote:
From:   "Ham Priday" <[email protected]>
Subject:    Re: [MD] The Quality of Freedom
Date:   December 12, 2009 1:12:35 AM PST
To: [email protected]

On Friday, 12/11/2009, 11:09 PM, "markhsmit" <[email protected]> wrote:



> Hi Ham,
> I guess I am trying to continue where you leave off. You described
> the mechanics of awareness, as that which is aware. Since
> nothingness is not aware, we negate it. This really doesn't fly when
> trying to understand the metaphysics of reality. It simply says that
> what exists exists. You can try to confound it with mathematical
> principles such as negation, or double negation, but it still explains
> very little. Once it is accepted that such negation is present, then yes,
> you can describe a world in which our sensibility is the source of
> our appreciation of existence. But such acceptance has no foundation.
> Sure, darkness is negated by light, but that is simply a definition of
> light. What is the principle by which light negates darkness?
> What is the principle behind awareness negating nothingness?
> You can say that it just does, and such negation cannot be described
> mechanistically. But I expect a little more than such shallowness.
>
> Where there was nothing there is now something.
> How does this happen?

I'd really like to move this discussion from negation to more relevant 
aspects of Essentialism -- Freedom, for instance. But I suppose you're 
looking for a fuller explanation of metaphysical negation, which is not an 
easy task for me.

I borrowed this concept from Hegel and the existentialists who believed that 
Being was the primary source from which essence was "actualized" as a 
negation. This theory is the reverse of mine, but (to satisfy your 
curiosity) here is how negation and double-negation are explained in (of all 
places) the 'Encyclopedia of Marxism':

"The following are references in Hegel to 'negation-of-the-negation', which 
is close to the Hegelian 'triad' of thesis-antithesis-synthesis:
(1) Hegel explains that in Essence, Being is negated (reflected in an image, 
'recognized') but as Being is 'reconstructed' as the 'sum of essence' it is 
again 'immediate', and we have Being again, but mediated through an 
other-world of itself in which it is reflected.
(2) Hegel explains how essence - the reflection of being - "turns out to be 
appearance", but then that 'appearance' is not 'mere; appearance but is 'the 
proximate truth of Being'. In other words, contrary to Kant, Hegel asserts 
that appearance, while it is transitory and purely relative, contains 
Essence and is objective. Thus Appearance is the negation of the negation of 
Being, Being at a higher level."

Now, although I can't follow Hegel's logic, the negation principle must be 
invoked if we are to explain creation "from the top down', that is, starting 
with an absolute source and leading to the particulars. Normally, we create 
something by building from the particulars--a brick wall, for example--and 
we think of creation as a "synthesis" of parts (e.g., bricks and mortar). 
Starting with a metaphysical absolute, however, creation has to be viewed as 
"de-synthesis" or reduction; and this, rather than a mathematical equation, 
is what negation implies.

I've rewritten Hegel's analysis to suit my ontogeny. Possibly you can 
improve on it. It goes something like this . . .

Because Essence is absolute in potentiality and contains no otherness, what 
it negates (or denies) in actuality must also be absolute. There is but one 
possible option: Nothingness. What Essence actualizes as an "other" is its 
antipodal Nothingness. Nothingness does not exist, either in Essence or in 
physical reality, because Essence negates it to actualize the appearance of 
Difference which, in the primary state, is Sensibility in opposition to 
Otherness. As you know, I call the undifferentiated Source "Essence" and 
the actualized (or created) appearance "Existence". The particular objects 
of existence and their attributes are valuistic products of a "secondary 
negation" by the negate which denies that Otherness is anything but "being", 
concurrently differentiating/extracting the value of "the particulars" 
(phenomena) for itself. That finite extraction is what we experience. 
(Interestingly, Eckhart's teachings support this hypothesis: "To create is 
to give being out of nothing," he said.)

> You seem to have little appreciation for the personal sense
> of awareness and like to describe things in an objective
> individual v otherness. This is missing a great part of the
> philosophy of self awareness.

Not true. (You haven't given me a chance.) Actually, most of the effort I 
put into my website and my book is directed at exploring the esthetic, 
intellectual, and sociological (moral) aspects of value and awareness.

> Perhaps if you were to delve a bit deeper into the ramifications
> of your belief, beyond the descriptive, you may gain an appreciation
> for those philosophies that try to describe the source, and its
> transitional personal behavior. It seems a shame that you do not
> try to build a better foundation than simply saying that it is what it is.

Have you checked out my "Values in the Balance" page? It's updated weekly 
with topical issues discussed by prominent philosophers, scientists, and 
political analysts. Next week's
column features an essay by Dinesh D'Souza (author of the best-seller 
"What's so Great about Christianity"). It goes on line Sunday at 
www.essentialism.net/balance.htm.

Happy reading, and a joyous Christmas to you and yours, Mark.

--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/


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/

Reply via email to