Take care.. 2010/9/30 MarshaV <[email protected]>
> > p.s. Not to worry about it. I think you're a tuba. Now back to sleep. > > > On Sep 30, 2010, at 1:21 PM, ADRIE KINTZIGER wrote: > > > But in fact , Parsi fal,---Fal Parsi, ....Parsi is slang for Farsi in > > Persian, and i do believe that Mark is indeed , Farsi-rooted > > Or so to speak, Iranian-originating , probably islamic. > > So exit in advance if Ham thinks to convert him, <= exit > > > > But i could be wrong! > > > > > > 2010/9/30 MarshaV <[email protected]> > > > >> > >> Adrie, > >> > >> What does this "exit<= exit=exit<=" mean? > >> > >> > >> Marsha > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> On Sep 30, 2010, at 8:37 AM, ADRIE KINTZIGER wrote: > >> > >>> exit<= exit=exit<= > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >>> > >>> 2010/9/30 Ham Priday <[email protected]> > >>> > >>>> > >>>> Greetings Mark -- > >>>> > >>>> I see you have a new handle. Where have you been keeping yourself? > (I > >>>> miss your insightful queries.) > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> I find it interesting how you use the metaphysics of physics > >>>>> to support a metaphysics of Quality. One metaphysics supporting > >>>>> another. Perhaps, as you say, they are both pointing towards > >>>>> some Truth. More than likely, they are both pointing the other > >>>>> way to an ultimate source. Both arise from the same place, > >>>>> so it is no coincidence that you find justification for > "non-physically > >>>>> provable ontologies in the physical sciences. > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> Generally I don't use physics to support metaphysics, nor is it good > >>>> practice. The Quantum Enigma seems to be on everyone's mind right > now, > >> and > >>>> with it the idea that Truth is ambiguous; so I thought someone should > >> assign > >>>> Science and Philosophy to their proper truth-seeking roles. It is > true, > >>>> however, that we are all trying to solve an enigma that is beyond our > >>>> finitely-limited range of experience. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> As you know, I have had a hard time with the evolutionary aspect > >>>>> of Quality as it has been described. Particularly since evolution > >>>>> describes adaptation towards an environment. What would the > >>>>> environment governing the evolution of Quality be? So, it is > important > >>>>> to move away from the physical concepts governing evolution > >>>>> as these are only dead ends. If indeed Quality governs evolution, > >>>>> then we can talk metaphysics. > >>>>> > >>>>> Your subjective sense of Quality as Value minimizes the concept. > >>>>> Yes, Value is one aspect, but not all of it. We have had discussions > >>>>> on your negation of Essence, and while it is an attractive concept > >>>>> (in an ineffable way), it does imply duality. My question would be, > >>>>> What is the source of that duality? How is it that the subjective > >> splits > >>>>> from the objective? Your physical support in terms of us being part > >>>>> of the equation we are describing is clear but circular. > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> Mark, I too have wrestled with the Quality concept, as quality (like > all > >>>> relative judgments) requires the sensibility of an observer. To the > >> degree > >>>> that evolution generates species better fitted to their environment, I > >>>> suppose one can say, euphemistically, that it is "governed by > quality". > >> (For > >>>> human beings, at least, the results are salutary.) But if evolution > is > >> a > >>>> directed process with a "final goal", the proper term is Teleology. > And > >>>> teleology implies a Designer whose unknown objective is part of the > >> enigma. > >>>> > >>>> As I have posted before, such metaphysical concepts > >>>>> are encapsulated in the notion of State Vector Collapse, > >>>>> where probability is made "real". ... > >>>>> > >>>>> but suffice it to say that (in my opinion) duality only exists > >>>>> in the form of social communication. Without that mirror > >>>>> of other, no duality exists. Like you say, it is impossible > >>>>> to avoid SOM in discussion, but that does not mean > >>>>> that it is thus the only alternative. > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> I strikes me as strange when people define the sense of otherness as a > >>>> "social" function. To me this is a Pirsigian concept intended to > >> circumvent > >>>> subjects and objects. Surely most of our experience deals with > >> otherness, > >>>> whether it's communication, manipulation, ingestion, exploration, > >>>> construction, or just plain thinking. When Descartes developed his > >> Cogito, > >>>> he was incommunicado, isolated from every external perception and > >> belief, > >>>> focusing only on pure thought. It was enough to convince him that he > >>>> existed, he was the knowing subject, and the existence of everything > >>>> else--the 'content' of experience--was in doubt. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> The phrase "observation creates reality" is a little nonsensical > >>>>> unless one is trying to convey an image. We could say that > >>>>> nothing exists without observation, but how would we know? > >>>>> One could just as easily say that "reality creates observation". > >>>>> If what you are saying is that no reality existed before your > >>>>> observation of it, then history itself has no meaning. > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> It is important to distinguish between "reality" and "existence", > Mark. > >>>> What we create via experience are images or patterns of being that > >> represent > >>>> the values on which we are focussed. In totality these patterns > >> constitute > >>>> "our reality" as existents, or simply Existence. But what we > experience > >> as > >>>> reality is relational, transitory, and therefore illusory. > >>>> We have no direct knowledge of primary or ultimate Reality, nor any > >> reason > >>>> to deduce that it is divided, evolutionary, or "created". > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> I noticed you qualified your statement (#2) by relating > >>>>> Value to empirical reality. Here you seem to be providing > >>>>> a definition by self referencing empiricism. There is honestly > >>>>> no equation in that statement that provides any further > >>>>> insight into a metaphysical notion. Yes, empiricism is defined > >>>>> as subjective, but for that you do not need to capitalize > >>>>> the V in value. > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> I capitalize the 'V' in value for the same reason that Pirsig > >> capitalizes > >>>> the 'Q' in quality. Value is a realized aspect of Essence, not > Reality > >>>> itself. Even in the empirical world, Value is essential, although we > >> only > >>>> experience it differentially. > >>>> > >>>> I would enjoy discussing Essentialism further, Mark, but am not sure > >> where > >>>> this is leading. Since we're restricted to keeping these dialogues > >> within > >>>> the province of the MoQ, I suggest that you frame your questions so > that > >>>> they address MoQ-related issues specifically. > >>>> > >>>> Nice to hear from you again, Mark. > >>>> > >>>> Best regards, > >>>> > >>>> 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 > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> parser > >>> 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 > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > parser > > 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 > -- parser 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
