[MD] Experience, essentialism, physicalism

[Scott Roberts]

David M,

> 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:
What leads you to say I am suppressing one side? I am redefining one side --  
the objective -- as signs rather than objects. That's not suppression.

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

DM: You might say that was Nothing.

Scott:
As Wolff says elsewhere, from a relative (our) standpoint it is nothing. 
That's why I depend on mystics, to tell me it is Some (non-)thing.

> 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.

Scott:
Sensed means: seen, heard, tasted, touched, or smelled. And yes, as we 
sense, we are changed, but then our consciousness is relative.

> 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.

Scott:
That we are insane (out of touch with Reality). Because we are insane, we 
sin, that is, cause ourselves and one another to suffer. Now I am not going 
to convince you of this. That is why I recommend reading Wolff. One note: 
the objects don't disappear on Awakening. Rather, Wolff describes it as a 
shift in the base of consciousness. As a consequence, more reality opens up 
(for example, a higher, non-conceptual form of intellect), and objects are 
no longer "just there", but one becomes aware of them as signs, not as 
having inherent self-existence as, in our insane state, we think of them. 
And so forth.

- Scott