Hi Joe --
On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 3:10 PM, "Joseph Maurer" <[email protected]> wrote:
Subject: Re: [MD] Taking Words Seriously
Hi Ham and All,
An image that has interested me lately is a deaf mute that sits
in the front pew in Church while someone signs the ongoing
events and words. Can I broaden my understanding by the
use of gestures only and not words? Do words written on a
computer qualify as gestures since I am deaf to your voice?
Imho The logical communication of the dynamics of the
differentiation in individuality can be addressed by levels in
existence, evolution. I am happy to discuss your hypothesis
if you feel indefinable individuality can be conceptualized as
a rock and a hard place outside of evolution.
How about 'All or Nothing' as a paradigm for existential reality? For,
indeed, this is what the world of experience comprises. We are concerned
with the 'All' of this paradigm; but it is 'Nothingness' which shapes and
differentiates its being. Likewise, 'Nothingness' individuates Sensibility,
which is the essential derivative by which the Self beomes the free agent of
existence.
The fundamental ontology of Essentialism is that Essence-not being-is the
ultimate reality and the primary, Absolute Source of diversity. For
diversity (contrariety and difference) to arise from absolute Oneness, there
must be a "differentiator" within the absolute potentiality of Essence. But
since essentialists define Essence as perfect "Is-ness" (Eckhart's term for
the All that IS), there is but one attribute within the absolute
potentiality of Essence that qualifies as a differentiator-Nothingness, the
antithesis of Is-ness.
Essence denies that it is nothingness, and so does not possess it, even
though nothingness is actualized to create a differentiated universe in
which value-sensibility is a cognizant agent. Nothingness is the "not" of
negation that divides one thing from another in the objective world, and one
perspective from another in subjective experience. In other words,
creation is the negation of an "uncreated" Source that knows no otherness.
Everything that exists is "excluded" from this negational Source that I call
Essence. And what can't be defined as finite 'existents'-Potentiality,
Sensibility, and Value-are the 'essential' attributes of Absolute Oneness.
My feel for logic has dwindled with age, and I apologize in advance for
illogical statements.
Despite your modesty, I know you are a logician, Joe. So, although I don't
believe logic can be extended beyond a relational system, I'm giving you an
opportunity to criticize the logic of this ontology before we engage in
further discussion.
Yours in the pursuit of understanding,
Ham
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
On 10/14/11 9:42 PM, "Ham Priday" <[email protected]> wrote:
Since you seem to be hung up on the dynamics of differentiation, I would
like to guide you through my hypothesis, if this interests you. I should
warn you in advance, however, that my theory does not rely on "levels of
evolution" which is a sequence of events in time that is dependent on the
mode of human experience. But if you are not wedded to Pirsig's
hierarchy
and are willing to consider an alternative, a dialogue on this important
topic may prove instructive for both of us.
Thanks, Joe. I shall await your decision.
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
