[Marsha]
But there is an awareness, that is separate from the five sense and
patterns, that does not cling to such imaginings. This
awareness/experience sits in the present. Witnessing. It seems to
be as proprietary as my eyes.
[Arlo]
I'm not sure what I can respond to here, except to maybe say I'd
restate this to read "This awareness/experience IS the present". When
you say "witnessing", it seems to me to play right into the SOM way
of thinking. I'd say that this apart-from-the-world witnessing thing
is the "optical delusion" Einstein was referring to. It is to give
into the proprietary biological boundedness by carrying this
"uniqueness" all the way the through the entirety of the "self". The
"you" that "witnesses" is the result of a merger between your unique
sensory trajectory and your appropriation of the shared narratives of
the collective. By forgrounding the "proprietary", you turn the
"self" into what Pirsig called "this autonomous little homunculus who
sits behind our eyeballs looking out through them in order to pass
judgment on the affairs of the world", which he calls "completely ridiculous".
[Arlo previously]
Prior to the appropriate of a shared, cultural consciousness, the
human organism has a sense of the world exclusive to its sensory experiences.
[Marsha]
So the books say.
[Arlo]
Well I don't privilege "the books", but I don't ignore them either.
[Marsha]
No offense Arlo, but this is all analogy, patterns,
storytelling. I'm trying to discover what is going on from the
experience point-of-view., and why I find this witnessing-awareness
so interesting.
[Arlo]
Fair enough, although I don't know how we can talk about things apart
from "analogy, patterns, storytelling". Of course what I say is all
these things. It HAS to be. It can't be anything else. But the same
goes for what you say. Viva la narrative!
[Marsha]
That is really sick!!! Sick experimentation by sick patterned individuals.
[Arlo]
No disagreement here. There was (and continues to be) a lot of very
low quality things done in the name of "research". Nonetheless, they
were done. And I suspect (right or wrong), the motivations were to
shed light on the fact that some biological patterns DO
self-cannibilize. And since this contradicts very strongly the idea
of an "awareness of self" apart from sensory input (in pre-social, or
pre-dialogic biological patterns), I find it supports the idea that
the "self" as understood by humans is a social phenomenon, not one
based in biology. As such, I refer to it only as these findings,
however distasteful the experiment, support Pirsig's statement that
"20th century French culture exists, therefore [Descartes] thinks,
therefore [Descartes] is".
[Marsha]
Boooooooo to you for replicating, even through writing, such
monsterous patterns.
[Arlo]
Fair enough.
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/md/archives.html
