G'day Ron --
[Ham] > "I've been arguing that the S/O reality is essential; > we need this division in order to sense otherness > as Value." [x] > This is why the statement "it cannot be proven that > anything exists outside humans" doesn't really fit. I think you mean "doesn't make sense". But, you see, Micah knows that there must be awareness before there is existence. And awareness always presupposes a referent object; otherwise, it's nothing. Therefore, the question to be resolved is, what is this object? I have yet to hear Micah's answer to this question. For me, since awareness is pre-intellectual, its object is also pre-intellectual. I submit that awareness itself is a dualism: it is Value-awareness. And it is Value-awareness that the intellect converts to objective experience. In other words, Micah is right in saying that there is no existence "outside humans", meaning outside of proprietary consciousness. We create our own objective reality from the Value which is our finite sense of Essence. > As one of the first scientists stated in "what the bleep", > quantum physics is a name created by scientists who > are totally baffled about the phenomena happening on > the atomic level. Thus a "theory of possiblities". > If parts of matter can pop in and out of reality, > then what seperates it from say, a thought? But as I stated > before, I feel they misinterpret what they observe, same as > the Columbus analogy, the natives saw the ships, they just > didn't know they were "ships" until a symbol of authority > could distinguish just what the heck they [were] actually > seeing, which was a big weird canoe. If the quantum scientists have proven that reality is fundamentally dependent on subjective consciousness, then they have indeed answered the epistemological question: We create our own reality. But I don't know any scientist who accepts this as a literal truth. Do you? Most of them are still working on the premise that man's brain and sensory system respond to external phenomena that evolve (by cosmic laws of probability) without him. Of course, that makes reality -- including man's awareness -- totally objective, which is absurd. > Man is the measure works in this in as far as the idea > of an infinite ultimate awareness that manifests itself > in quantum multiplicity and realizes itself aware and > separate through negation. > So it is a "self posited I" and part of an ultimate awareness, > only the self posited I is confused by the s/o reality it > requires to experience anything and interprets itself as separate. > If the theory is correct then all matter is a manifestation of this > awareness and influences it at every moment. > Now, what you call this ultimate awarenes is the topic of > much debate. This is where Hegel fused it with Christianity. > > ..Personally I feel quantum theory leaves the window open > to all kinds of conjecture, and I have my misgivings about > quantum theory as a whole. I would like to think that quantum theory has at least suggested the answer I stated above. But I don't expect Science to accept this answer because of its objectivist methodology. I have more hope for Philosophy -- especially for "qualitative" ontologies like the MoQ. Unfortunately, the lack of a well-developed metaphysics leaves us hanging in the limbo of levels and patterns of Quality with no ultimate source, cause, or purpose. What we have is a euphemistic "feel-good" scenario that replaces religion for those who can accept "betterness" as a universal principle. If our spirituality demands something more, there's always Mysticism. > I feel things moving to a new level of understanding. I hope you're right, Ron. Essentially yours, 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.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
