Marsa, Ron, You talking about "Choosing Reality" by "this book" Marsha ? (As opposed to Vescio's introduction in "Pragmatism" mentioned by Ron. My edition has an intro by A J Ayer, Ron ? Which do you have ?)
Ian On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 4:04 PM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I'd love to hear Dawkins, Dennett and Hitchens comment on this book. In > fact, I'l love to hear Krimel comment on this book. But I'm premature and > only to page 67. Maybe there will be scientific redemption and resurrection > somewhere in future chapters. > > > > > > On Oct 11, 2010, at 8:58 AM, MarshaV wrote: > >> >> OMG! What a book! Science, as it as been presented to me up through even >> last week, lay before me beaten to an unrecognizable bloody pulp that >> stopped breathing an hour ago. Oh my... Oh my... But, being pragmatic >> and the fact that I like, no love listening to Beethoven's Ninth Symphony on >> my iPod, I run to get a box of bandaids. >> >> >> >> >> On Oct 11, 2010, at 5:07 AM, MarshaV wrote: >> >>> >>> Hi John, >>> >>> I think you'd like this book be B. Alan Wallace 'Choosing Reality: A >>> Buddhist View of Physics and the Mind.' The book has early on a chapter >>> tracing the history of the scientific realism versus scientific >>> instrumentalism debate. Very interesting!!! The next chapter is on >>> science today. >>> >>> >>> Marsha >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Oct 6, 2010, at 6:50 PM, John Carl wrote: >>> >>>> made me look, Marsha. Even worse, made me wiki-look. >>>> ---On Rationalism vs. Empiricism >>>> The most prominent distinguishing characteristic between these two >>>> philosophies is that strict empiricists reject all *a priori* truths, >>>> decrying any belief in innate knowledge or intuition >>>> -------- >>>> >>>> So to an empiricist, "belief" is the problem. Do they believe this >>>> strongly? And from what "facts" is it derived? >>>> >>>> Hmmm... indeed. I'm with you on that one, Marsha. >>>> >>>> John >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sat, Oct 2, 2010 at 11:00 AM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Hello again, >>>>> >>>>> Been thinking, normally dangerous, but with a fever doubly so. - I keep >>>>> thinking about you using the term "rational construct". It seems to me >>>>> while your Philosophy of Essence and the Metaphysics of Quality are both >>>>> centered on Value their major difference is reason versus experience. >>>>> Yes? >>>>> Rationality versus Empiricism? Do you agree? And having done a search, >>>>> I >>>>> see ti is a very old conflict, indeed. Hmmm. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Marsha >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Oct 2, 2010, at 2:49 AM, MarshaV wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Greetings Ham, >>>>>> >>>>>> On Oct 2, 2010, at 2:05 AM, Ham Priday wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Marsha: >>>>>>>> How I understand conscious awareness is as pure process, >>>>>>>> 100% immediate experience, and the moment one tries to >>>>>>>> analyze it, it is gone. All other entities - I, knower, self, >>>>>>>> individual, me, etc. - are _conceptually constructed_ and >>>>>>>> have no independent existence. They are a conglomerate >>>>>>>> ever-changing, impermanent, interdependent, inorganic, >>>>>>>> biological, social and intellectual static patterns of value. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Ham: >>>>>>> Marsha, you are attempting to describe the subjective self as if it were >>>>> an objective entity, which of course is impossible. Yes, "raw" experience >>>>> is "immediate", but it hardly represents 100% of conscious awareness. >>>>> There >>>>> is also the memory function which links self-awareness to the past and >>>>> makes >>>>> experience a continuum; the emotive response which is the >>>>> psycho-biological >>>>> reaction to what is experienced; and intellection which interprets the >>>>> data >>>>> as a rational construct. 'I', 'Knower', 'Individual', and 'Me' are not >>>>> different entities but simply the labels we use to identify the Self. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> That standard definition, which even you must be tired of by now, paints >>>>> a fuzzy picture of self-awareness as if to demean its credibility--which >>>>> of >>>>> course is your intent. I still feel this is somewhat disingenuous on your >>>>> part. Certainly we cannot objectivize, quantify, measure, or localize >>>>> conscious awareness as we can, say, a rock or a tree. Conversely, >>>>> however, >>>>> what would the rock or tree be if there was no awareness of it? As Pirsig >>>>> insisted, experience is primary; and since experience is known only to >>>>> awareness, all we really know about objective existence is that it is >>>>> patterned from sensible value. >>>>>> >>>>>> Marsha: >>>>>> I am putting aside the experience of raw data (unpatterned experience) >>>>> and talking about conscious awareness as in mindfulness. Mindfulness is a >>>>> technique easily learned and strengthened through practice. It's the >>>>> experience of being here-now without constructing an associated past or >>>>> future. In the mindfulness experience there is no building a subjective >>>>> self for it is all _process_, all immediate experience. Pattern >>>>> recognition >>>>> seems limited to the function of the sense organ. It is _habit_ that >>>>> associates these immediate experiences with an individual, independent >>>>> self, >>>>> or its various labels, rather than understanding that it is a flow of >>>>> experiences. _Habit_ that when conscious awareness (mindfulness) stops >>>>> then >>>>> the making of meaning begins (internal story-telling). It is the >>>>> conceptual >>>>> constructing, making of meaning, that creates the independent self. It is >>>>> an after-experience add-on. I am suggesting that in mindfulness it is >>>>> obvious that experiences comes fi >>>>> rst, and that associating now-experiences to a 'self' is a secondary >>>>> habit. Experience is primary! Self-building is secondary. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks Ham, >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Marsha >>> >>>> >> >> ___ >> >> >> 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
