[MD] Experience, essentialism, physicalism

[David M]

Hi Scott

> Scott:
> As mentioned in the posts, the difference is in which evolutionary tale 
> one
> tells. Did you catch the quote from Merrell-Wolff, about *all* objects 
> being
> voids, having a strictly symbolic nature? That is idealism. Materialism is
> saying that there were rocks before there was consciousness. Big 
> difference,
> it seems to me.

DM: Yeah, what's your point? Of course they're different, but I am not
sure that you can solve the dualism by suppressing one side of the split.
I would expect you to realise that.

>
> Scott:
> Read Wolff. It could be that which is unaffected by change.

DM: You might say that was Nothing.

> Scott:
> Or one cannot notice that their hardness, color, shape, etc. only exist 
> when
> sensed.

DM: Sensed? What do we mean by sense? Is the experience of
any other not to be changed by that other? We do not observe
unaffected, we are in constant change.


> DM said:
> So guys, what's your problem? In what way do you think we currently
> don't have a full understanding of reality, what are the key problems?
>
> Scott:
> Mystics tell us we have an appearance/Reality problem. I believe them.

DM: What is the problem herefor you? It is all reality and it all appears,
is there any distinction at all. I suggest on the side of enlightenment 
there is not.