Hmm, yes , i was aware of it, please keep in mind the "Timewindow" William was living in, in that time , he was far ahead of everyone, in this frame, during that time, it was all state of the art.
At least some of it became , later on, in this timewindow,--indifferent in the balance. James planted the seeds , some live on , some not. The survivors are still cutting edge of insights. 2010/12/4 MarshaV <[email protected]> > > Such fun... > > > "The asymmetry in James's view of mind and matter may be due in part to > his advocacy of a "field theory" of consciousness, in contrast to an > "atomistic theory," which he vigorously rejects. I would argue, however, > that the nature of consciousness does not intrinsically conform either to a > field theory or an atomistic theory. Rather, different kinds of conscious > events become apparent when inspected from the perspective of each of these > different conceptual frameworks. Using James's field theory, one may > ascertain an individual, discrete continuum of awareness; and using the > atomic theory one may discern within the stream of consciousness discrete > moments of awareness and individual, constituent mental factors of those > moments. Thus, while certain features of consciousness may be perceived > only within the conceptual framework of a field theory, others may be > observed only in terms of an atomistic theory. This complementarity is > reminiscent of the relation between par > ticle and field theories of mass/energy in modern physics. The crucial > point here is that neither conceptual framework is inherent in the nature of > pure experience. James seems to have fallen into the trap of reifying his > own concept of a field of consciousness, and this may have prevented him > from determining, even to his own satisfaction, the way in which > consciousness does and does not exist. > > "James did not present a practical means of transcending one's familiar > conceptual framework and entering into the state of pure experience. On the > contrary, he declared, "Only new-born babes, or men in semi-coma from sleep, > drugs, illnesses, or blows, may be assumed to have an experience pure in the > literal sense of a that which is not yet any definite what." Given his keen > interest in and appreciation for mystical experience, it is strange that he > apparently did not consider that advanced contemplatives may have gained > access to conceptually unmediated consciousness that would have a strong > bearing on his notion of pure experience." > > Wallace, B. Alan, 'The Taboo of Subjectivity: Towards a New Science of > Consciousness',pp.114-115) > > > > p.s. Please not how the word 'reifying' is being used at the bottom of the > first paragraph. > > > > __ > > > 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
