Cogito, we think, therefore we are... J A
24 mar 2013 kl. 11.49 skrev MarshaV: > > Greetings, > > See how easily he dismisses the paradox to suit one particular > interpretation: His. > > Here is something by David Bohm that hints at the confusion: > > "Reality is what we take to be true. What we take to be true is what we > believe. What we believe is based upon our perceptions. What we perceive > depends upon what we look for. What we look for depends on what we think. > What we think depends on what we perceive. What we perceive determines > what we believe. What we believe determines what we take to be true. What > we take to be true is our reality." > > (Mathieu Ricard & Trinh Xuan Thuan, 'The Quantum and the Lotus: > A Journey to the Frontiers Where Science and Buddhism Meet', > p.121) > > > Marsha > > > > > On Mar 23, 2013, at 4:53 PM, david buchanan <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> dmb said: >> There is no such thing as a preconceptual [tree]. It's one of "the forms >> which we make" and DOES NOT YET exist in "the basic flux of experience". >> >> Pirsig said: >> "You can't be aware that you've seen a tree until after you've seen the >> tree, and between the instant of vision and instant of awareness there must >> be a time lag. . . The tree that you are aware of intellectually, because of >> that small time lag, is always in the past." (Pirsig, ZAMM) >> >> >> >> Craig Erb asked: >> How do we reconcile these 2 quotes. On the one hand, the tree is only in >> the FUTURE, after experience. On the other hand, the tree is in the past >> BEFORE intellectual awareness. IMHO there are 2 varieties of the MoQ: >> anthrocentric MoQ (AMoQ) and pan-experiential MoQ (PMoQ). In AMoQ spov's >> emerge from the experience of humans. In PMoQ spov's emerge from their own >> experience: amoebae back away from acid and iron filings value movement >> toward magnets, without humans being involved. >> >> >> >> dmb says: >> The Pirsig quote comes from the middle of ZAMM, where he's trying to explain >> Quality in terms that could be understood by the faculty in Bozeman, who >> were behaviorists. So I don't think there are two varieties of the MOQ so >> much as there are simple and sophisticated ways to express this idea. In >> Lila, where the levels of static quality are organized into an evolutionary >> hierarchy, it is very tempting to conceive of them as evolving and emerging >> long before humans came along to experience them but that is a huge mistake. >> That way of taking it would convert the MOQ back into SOM because the world >> would be conceived as an external pre-existing reality, an objective reality >> by a new name. >> >> > 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
