ROGER DISAGREES WITH SOLIPSISTIC VERSIONS OF THE MOQ
AND OFFERS TWO DEFINITIONS OF CONSCIOUSNESS TO BETTER
GET BEHIND SOME EMERGING PLATYPI
To Glove, Platt, Rich, Ken and Walter:
Interesting discussion. Allow me to offer some feedback here and there.
Rich:
>What is consciousness? We must explain it within the MOQ.
Roger:
Consciousness per William James is one half of the duality that we create out
of Direct Experience. Objective reality is the other half. James explains
that the most accurate depiction of this duality is not one of division
though, it is one of addition. We count experience twice, and from one angle
it is subjective consciousness and from the other angle it is objective
reality. The world of metaphysics and moral levels of the MOQ is one side of
this duality.
Glove:
>The universe didn't begin billions of years ago... it began when we each
>became aware of it. And it will not end in billions of years as it expands
>into plasma streams or collapses back on itself... it will end when each
>of
>us as individuals die. That is the beginning and ending of Quality as we
>understand it to be. That is the beginning and ending of the universe.
>And to my understanding, the MOQ states the same.
Roger:
In the context of objective reality as above, I guess I could agree. The
object requires it's complement of the subject like black requires white and
high creates low. However, the undefinable experience called DQ will continue
to exist. We are derived from Quality and it in no way ends with the end of
our subjective experience. We are just one pattern of countless patterns
derived from the infinite stream of Quality. The pattern of sq we identify as
self will end, but that was always the illusory self. The MOQ recommends
going beyond the static world of self and instead becoming one with Pure
Experience. This Pure Experience by the way is the same as Consciousness in
Zen and mysticism.
Sorry for introducing two definitions of consciousness, but this helps
clarify much confusion. The subjective consciousness that James alludes to
of course ends with the subject's demise. However, the Pure Experience that
is known as mystical consciousness is infinite and timeless. The self is a
ghost created out of true Pure Experience. The ghost was never really alive,
so worrying about its death is folly.
As for Platt's tombstone -- "Mine was the only world" -- it seems the
absolute antithesis of everything in the MOQ and everything Platt has ever
written. Were you being facetious? Is this like an SOM joke?
Glove:
>Pirsig writes: "These patterns can't by themselves perceive or adjust to
>Dynamic Quality. Only a living being can do that." (pg. 185 teal paperback)
Roger:
I don't think this statement is correct. I believe Pirsig erred here. If
this is true, then how did the living patterns emerge from inorganic matter
to begin with? If this is true, then how does the governor on a steam engine
respond to the dynamic increase in temperature? If this is true, then the
entire inorganic level cannot respond to quality. If this is true, then
artificial intelligence is doomed.
I would agree that the complexity required for dynamic systems requires
extremely advanced patterns, and that these patterns are USUALLY only seen in
living things or in the net interaction of numbers of living things.
However, I believe there are exceptions to this rule, and that the MOQ
undermines itself completely by sticking with this concept.
But I could be wrong.
Rog
HAPPY FATHER'S DAY!!!!!!
MOQ Online Homepage - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Unsubscribe - http://www.moq.org/md/index.html
MD Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
