On Tues, May 24, 2011 5:02 PM, "Joseph Maurer" <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Ham and all,
Try to envision an emotional level in which the individual is indefinable
(no terms capture the reality of individuality since it is indefinable).
Once that vision is secure Posit a definable 1. This is how I see
evolution from an indefinable DQ emotional level to a definable SQ
intellectual level. The emotional level DQ defines 1 and evolution
carries this 1 to an SQ Intellectual level which creates mathematical
logic.
I can't envision an "emotional level", as it has no meaning for me.
Emotions are what we feel in response to experience. It may be joy,
sadness, frustration, anxiety, doubt, love, hate, or desire. Do we need a
"level" for each of these feelings? Is there a "pain level" and a "distress
level", as well as a feelings level? There is no logic for this euphemism,
since feelings are simply the state of individual awareness at a given time,
just as intellection is the process of thinking rationally.
You say individuality is indefinable. Why can it not be defined simply as
"the unit of awareness" whereby one identifies his knowing self? Indeed,
inasmuch as this is self-evident, why do we even need a definition?
Your problem, Joe, is that you refuse to acknowledge "selfness"--the very
core of your existental reality. And, if you have no self, you can't be a
free agent, let alone lay claim to a life experience of your own. (Marsha
has somewhat the same problem).
Furthermore, when you build your ontology on evolution (i.e., process in
time), you put the cart in front of the horse when it comes to the Source.
For if evolution "carries nature" from the lowest to the highest levels,
your Source comes at the end of this entire progression! How do you explain
a Creator coming onto the scene after all its creation is finished? How
logical is that scenario, Joe?
Later, you added: "For me, evolution speaks to higher or lower values."
Evolution evidently "speaks to you" also, though at what particular level I
haven't the slightest idea. Until you realize that it is the individual who
determines what is of value, and to what degree or measure, you will never
appreciate the sensibility you've been granted as a human being.
I can understand why metaphysical prepositions are sometimes regarded as
illogical. But I find it incredulous that an intelligent person such as
yourself can be persuaded that an "emotional level" defines unity. It makes
me wonder what you would make of epistemology.
Thanks for a fascinating glimpse into the workings of your mind,
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
