[Platt] An opposing viewpoint from David Darling, British astronomer: "No, it cannot be proved that the subject-object dualistic view of nature is wrong and more than it can be proved it is right. But let us suspend judgment. Let us accept that it may at least be equally valid to think of the universe as being a true indivisible entity. Where does this view of reality lead?
"If we accept that everything in the universe has a subjective aspect, then the brain appears in a new light. The brain begins to look more like a regulator or editor of consciousness-a reducing valve. Most, if not all the major organs are regulators. The lungs don't manufacture the air we our bodies need; the stomach and intestines are not food producers. So if we manufacture neither the air we breath nor the food we eat, why assume that we make, rather than regulate, what we think?" -- from "Soul Search" [Case] Yes, every time I have a question about psychology I look to an astronomer for answers. Especially ones that ask me to suspend judgment while he engages in flights of fantasy. I think it is equally important to consult psychologist for their views of astrophysics. 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/
