Hey John, Rather than discuss paragraph by paragraph I will respond to just one part.
Let me first say that I enjoy this discussion, it kind of tingles my brain. The part is, about thinking in words. In my opinion, words are just the last aspect of a thought. Kind of the culmination of a rumination which is transcribed into a communicative form. Yes, we do talk to ourselves. Such communication allows a congealment, if you will, of the thoughts into an easily accessible memory databank. However, in my opinion there is a lot more than goes on before the words. One has to look for it as one is thinking. Thoughts tend to arise from a deeper region, I could call it emotional, but that only leads to silly semantic discussions, so I will cal it awareness. When we feel fear, we convert that to thoughts, such as Why? But the thoughts are secondary. The same can be said for love, (how do I love thee, let me count the ways). Now, thoughts are important because it causes the brain to focus, and thus survive the next onslaught of danger, or whatever. Indeed, thoughts can hold an awareness even when such holding becomes counterproductive, hence all the neurotics and psychologists. We are taught that such focussing and rational deliberation is the human way (and I would hate to be called stupid). To let ones thoughts be free is the easiest way to escape their hold, otherwise it is just one thought trying to control another. There is thinking going on all along which is not in focus. You know, the Eureka moment, the poem that comes into your head in a shower, the certainty that you have reached a definite decision. These are wordless, they are much more complicated that the simple dictation of a letter. Now that I'm started, how about a slight divergence? The question is, do we control our thoughts, or do thoughts happen to us? If one chooses control, then one perhaps has to assume a controller. Is there a specific region that directs the thought process? And if so, how is this region controlled? We are not getting into the whole free will thing here, just the aspect of our thoughts being within our control. When one decides to think about something, what makes that decision? The reason for this divergence is to bring forth the notion that we are not our thoughts. For whatever reason we identify more with these thoughts than, say our heartbeat, but they are not the sum total of our awareness, just a flower on a big tree with lots of leaves and branches. Now, the flower is necessary for communication. Thus the emphasis on communication as one of the levels. It is so nice to get away from all of it, not having to be prepared to make the next communication, take a walk. The mind wanders laterally, and who knows what kind of thoughts it will come up with, I can certainly not predict what I will think about tomorrow. Cheers, Mark On Sat, Oct 2, 2010 at 12:37 PM, John Carl <[email protected]> wrote: > Mark points out=> > > When a child is born, it has no > > concept of other. In fact it cannot distinguish itself from its mother > for > > a while. When a child is born, all it has is Will. > > > Right Mark. Although to be precise, the abstract entity of "child" is a > social label applied to a pattern of value that we cognizers of values slap > on its butt (shortly after smacking it's behind to help introduce it to > air) This "Will" you speak of, is a purely instinctual urge to get its > biological needs met. Then, through the process of getting its needs met > by > mothering, it learns it's social place and all about otherness. > > > > > > > This then becomes more > > All Self and No Other. What this means is that during the early stages > of > > development, a human has NO SOM. I'll spare you the other stages. > > > > I like this because I think there is a crucial distinction here, between > 4th level intellectual patterns concerning the fundamental nature of the > subject/object metaphysical stance, and the self-other realization which > occurs at the social level, and is the basis for much of our knowing. > > subject/object realization rather than subject/object metaphysical belief. > The first is a social pattern and the second is about the social pattern - > an absolutization on an intellectual level, of a very basic, > lowest-common-denominator of realization of self-existence. The > "kindergarten" of the 4th level - SOM. > > Mark: > > > > > Now, how can we even say this is a possibility? Well, I am no > > psychologist, > > but you will find this kind of thing in such journals. A more convincing > > example of the absence of SOM in early childhood can be found in certain > > accounts of autistic people (please don't get too caught up in the > autistic > > label stuff, it is only misleading). There are people, labeled as > autistic > > (for lack of a better term) who are capable of living part time in an > > autistic world of pure sense, and then capable of communicating with the > > rest of us as to what that type of consciousness is like in our own > logical > > terms. Now, I don't want to seem kind of fringe on this kind of thing. > If > > you are interested in the applications of SOM and Quality to autism, then > I > > suggest you read Autism: The Lost Art of Sensing by Donna Williams. She > > can > > explain it much better than I, because she lives it. And, no, it is not > > fruitcake stuff, but it does take an open mind. > > > > > John: > > Sounds interesting. There's a lot to learn about ourselves through > aberrant > extremes of brain-behavior, imo. > > Mark: > > > > If you accept the paragraph above, I can go on to say that SOM develops > > during childhood, for most of us. > > > John: > > Well yes. Everything does! But more than when, I'm interested in the why. > Innate or programmed? I'd say it's programmed in by culture. scarey > thought- especially in light of an increasingly aberrant cultural pattern, > to be sure. > > Mark: > > > > In fact some people can vividly remember > > when they became aware (so to speak). Carl Jung speaks about this (I > > forget > > where). The tipping point is communication. Because of communication we > > need to label things, you know, nouns, verbs. Try to differentiate > pacing, > > from walking, from loping, from jogging, from meandering... you know what > I > > mean. > > > > John: > > Yes. I do. Communication is the tipping point, indeed. A signifier, a > signified and a sign. > > Mark: > > This simplification of our perception into quantified things is > > necessary because our brains need to condense reality into little > > simplified > > bits. > > > John: > > Exactly. Thinking itself is dependent upon meaning, a narrate, a story. > Every word contains a story and stories are nothing but collections of > words. Which is fundamental? > > word, dude. > > Mark: > > > > As you know, there were people who were obsessed with this such as > > Aristotle. You can appreciate that by having to simplify into words, > much > > of the original experience is lost. > > > > John: > > Ellul butts in his ugly french head and disagrees, "non, non" he shakes his > head sadly. > > What he means is that meaning and experience arise out of this fundamental > relationship - the interaction between self and other IS experience itself, > and these are not two distinct entities, but co-creative, a co-dependent > arising, as you pointed out to start this "moq difference". Another good > name than Quality for this co-dependence, is communication - a word. Not > so > much a "good" word, as the goodness OF words- the cognizant reflection of > self and other that it seems only humans do, so it's hard to judge whether > they do it well or not. > > > Mark: > > > > > Suffice it to say that words do improve > > memory so that if you attach some awareness to a word, it is easier to > > recall that awareness through this word. It is sometimes proposed that > we > > think in words. Nothing could be farther from the truth. It is only > words > > when communication is involved, it is only SOM when words are involved. > > Most of our consciousness is wordless > > > > > > John: > > Well, speak for yourself there. Mine's all in words. Everything I think > about, I do so verbally. All feelings are conceptualized, often they are > conceptualized poorly, or misunderstood and transferred - in other words, > the verbal creations which we use to story things in memory and access, > assign as words to a feeling that are completely "wrong" or mis-applied. > And by this we mean "unconscious" or "subconscious" or whatever. But just > because the verbally processed information about our ideas or feelings is > mis-applied, they are there, testimony to a certain existence - a reality. > And if there is no word, no concept, no realization at all, of any > differentiation, then there's no reality. Where there is no word, there is > no reality. > > Mark: > > > > Now, I could go on, but I will leave it at that for now. So, again, I am > > not circumventing anything in fact it would appear that you are. You > > provide vague notions of this cognitive agent of awareness by wrapping it > > in > > cosmic separation from something else. Sure, water becomes gas when it > > gets > > hot, and thus separates, but how does such a notion create cognitive > > awareness? You are missing a lot of pieces in between. I would be more > > than > > happy to have you present to me how personal consciousness arrises. > > > > > John: It could also be, that he's just trying to get your goat, Mark. He > can have mine, anytime. I've learned a lot from arguing with Ham. I'm > most > grateful to the old goat. > > > > Mark: > > > > So, I have no intention of disinheriting the subjective sense, in fact I > am > > embracing it. It is your pseudo logical encapsulation of this sense into > > an > > ineffable construct which creates the disinheritance. What I see so far > is > > much hand-waving. > > > > All in good fun, > > Mark > > > > > > > Stay calm. Be brave. Wait for the signs. > > John Charles Peirce > 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
