Wilber on Descartes...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fa4WtuR0wbY
On Jul 30, 2010, at 3:49 PM, MarshaV wrote:
>
> Hmmmmm. Interesting...
>
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NQ_HsQkBkJA
>
>
>
> On Jul 30, 2010, at 1:40 PM, MarshaV wrote:
>
>>
>> Greetings Ham,
>>
>> Both of your statements "Neither ideas nor "patterns of value" exist
>> without a cognizant agent to realize them." and "YOU are the cognizant
>> agent of your values." are, in fact, also conceptual ideas, or as I would
>> label them: static patterns of value. And your statement "YOU are your
>> SELF."? It is pure concept!
>>
>> You do not go far enough.
>>
>>
>> Marsha
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Jul 30, 2010, at 1:16 PM, Ham Priday wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Dear Marsha --
>>>
>>>> You wrote "ALL awareness is proprietary to the self.", and I
>>>> continue to maintain that there is no self. An "independent self"
>>>> is no more than a flow of ever-changing, interdependent,
>>>> inorganic, biological, social, and intellectual static patterns of value.
>>>> On reflection, the awareness I describe has nothing consistent
>>>> or central about it, either. I think it best that I keep it away from
>>>> analysis which will surely distort the experience into an
>>>> independent entity, which is what intellectual analysis is prone to do.
>>>
>>> You avoid analysis for the very reason that the "independent entity" you
>>> thnk is a "distortion" of your experience is in fact your "self".
>>>
>>> I know you're tired of hearing me say this, but "inorganic, biological,
>>> social, and intellectual static patterns of value" is a conceptual idea.
>>> Ideas are thoughts structured by the subjective mind and sometimes
>>> communicated to others by words and symbols. Patterns are relational
>>> configurations recognized intellectually and added to ideas or precepts.
>>> Neither ideas nor "patterns of value" exist without a cognizant agent to
>>> realize them. YOU are the cognizant agent of your values.
>>>
>>> To put it as simply as I can (i.e., no analysis required), YOU are your
>>> SELF.
>>>
>>> May the peace of understanding comfort you,
>>> Ham
>>>
>>> _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
>>>
>>>> On Jul 29, 2010, at 2:04 PM, Ham Priday wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Marsha, and welcome Andy --
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks to you both for introducing a subject dear to my heart. I only
>>>>> wish Marsha had titled this new thread "the cognitive agent" rather than
>>>>> "cognitive awareness."
>>>>>
>>>>> [Marsha]:
>>>>>> I don't know if you might have a comment, or that I can agree
>>>>>> with such a comment, but I share this interest with you for
>>>>>> what it is worth.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So many times I have wanted to explore this with you,
>>>>>> but it is difficult. I do not believe it is something RMP
>>>>>> confronts directly, but I can easily relate it to unpatterned
>>>>>> experience and static patterns. Regardless, I am an
>>>>>> introverted explorer and wonder about the flow of
>>>>>> consciousness and awareness.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cognitive awareness comes under the topic of epistemology, a study sorely
>>>>> missing in Pirsig's Quaity thesis. As a consequence, the difference
>>>>> between intellect and awareness is muddled, and thinking, if not
>>>>> awareness itself, is often falsely attributed to some extracorporeal
>>>>> domain.
>>>>>
>>>>>> For me the 'flow of consciousness' comes in two flavors.
>>>>>> There is the creative re-membering of static patterns from the past.
>>>>>> And there is the creative projecting of static patterns into a future.
>>>>>> Unless this seems to be address solving a problem, I dismiss
>>>>>> most as imaginative story.
>>>>>
>>>>> Memory, experience, and intellectual projection are all components of
>>>>> conscious awareness. When used in combination, we call it reasoning or
>>>>> intellection. Simple example: I emptied the milk container at breakfast
>>>>> yesterday (memory); I'm hungry for creamed chipped beef but see no milk
>>>>> in the refrigerator (experience); I shall therefore have to visit the
>>>>> grocery store and purchase more before lunch (reasoning).
>>>>>
>>>>>> There is also an cognitive 'awareness' that is more immediate,
>>>>>> and more puzzling. I suppose it is the techniques of mindfulness
>>>>>> that brings this type of experience to ones attention.
>>>>>> I have read that the Buddhist define these as six consciousnesses
>>>>>> representing the five senses and mind: I am aware of the thought
>>>>>> of a dog. I am aware of seeing a dog. I am aware of hearing
>>>>>> a dog, smelling a dog, feeling a dog, etc.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There is another type of awareness that seems to be awareness
>>>>>> without an 'I' and without an object. It is impossible to grasp
>>>>>> because it is lost the moment one tries. This is the awareness I
>>>>>> have called 'unpatterned experience'. This is more like rabbit/duck
>>>>>> graphic experience that Craig cited, but it's unpatterned/patterned.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Anyway, there does seem to be a cognitive agent(individual) involved,
>>>>>> but not one I would designate a consistent, central controller.
>>>>>
>>>>> Forget about the "controller"; ALL awareness is proprietary to the self.
>>>>> What you are describing here is immanent sensibility -- awareness
>>>>> captured by cognitive value. A typical example of this is being struck
>>>>> by "love at first sight". You instantly realize the value of the
>>>>> experience or insight without rationalizing the reasons. As Platt has
>>>>> suggested, aesthetic experience -- beauty, magnificence, rapture, etc. --
>>>>> also falls into this category.
>>>>>
>>>>> I've always been concerned by your denial of a "self", Marsha, and
>>>>> suspect that it comes from reading too much Buddhist philosophy. You are
>>>>> a cognizant creature, which means that you are aware of what you think
>>>>> and feel. Nobody else has Marsha's awareness, thinks for her, or forms
>>>>> her ideas. There's no domain out there that contains Marsha's intellect
>>>>> or moral values. As a cognizant human being your life-experience is
>>>>> absolutely unique. You are the cognizant locus of your reality, This
>>>>> doesn't mean you are not influenced by the thoughts of others, only that
>>>>> what you know and feel as Marsha is yours alone.
>>>>>
>>>>> [Andy]:
>>>>>> Marsha, you mentioned unpatterned experience and cognitive
>>>>>> agents. I think cognition is essentially pattern recognition.
>>>>>> The agent of cognition is concerned with patterns previously\
>>>>>> recognized and patterns newly recognized. This almost fits with
>>>>>> your "two flavors".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I fail to see how an agent can have unpatterned experience.
>>>>>> "Awareness of" is what you get *after* the Quality event.
>>>>>> How can awareness take place before Quality has created values?
>>>>>> That would permit Quality to be *seen* but that's impossible;
>>>>>> only values can be seen. We know about Quality because we see
>>>>>> everything that it creates; we don't see Quality itself.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My experiences in meditation and psychedelia may have fooled me
>>>>>> into believing that I could do that. I don't believe it anymore. I think
>>>>>> what happened was a temporary inaccessibility of most previously
>>>>>> recognized patterns. As mysterious and wonderful and terrible as it
>>>>>> was, that experience was not unpatterned. It was far less rigidly
>>>>>> patterned than the experience to which I had become accustomed,
>>>>>> so less static and closer to DQ, but not quite there.
>>>>>
>>>>> I agree with your epistemology, if not your psychedelia, Andy. However,
>>>>> I view the Self as the "agent", and in deference to Pirsig, I do believe
>>>>> cognitive agents are primarily oriented to non-discrete ("unpatterned"?)
>>>>> Value or what he called "pre-intellectual experience". Epistemologists
>>>>> might say we are "wired to be value-sensible". Value is primary to
>>>>> cognizant awareness. How else can we explain the impact value has on us,
>>>>> let alone the fact that we create values as experienced phenomena?
>>>>>
>>>>> On the other hand, I depart from Pirsig's theory that Quality (Value) is
>>>>> the agent/agency of the cosmos and its guiding "moral principle". I say
>>>>> this for the following reasons. First of all, Value is an attribute of
>>>>> the Primary Source, not an independent "essence" in its own domain.
>>>>> Secondly, it is obvious to me that man is uniquely equipped with the
>>>>> value-sensibility and intellect that enables him to be a "free agent" of
>>>>> value. (Unfortunately, Individual Freedom is not a concept championed by
>>>>> Mr. Pirsig.) Putting all this together, my philosophy holds that man
>>>>> exists to freely realize the value of Essence and exercise his rational,
>>>>> self-directed value in creating a moral world.
>>>>>
>>>>> As Marsha knows, I call this philosophy Essentialism. As a newcomer
>>>>> here, Andy, you are cordially invited to read my online thesis at
>>>>> www.essentialism.net/mechanic.htm.
>>>>>
>>>>> Essentially yours,
>>>>> 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/md/archives.html
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>>
>>
>> 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
>
>
>
> ___
>
>
> 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
___
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
