[MD] The differentiating nothingness

[platootje at netscape.net]

  Hello Ham,

 A final note on our dispute about nothingness, you say:

  "I'm not a physicist and am unaware of any evidence for that 
conclusion.
 However, I don't base my philosophy on the scientific theory, whether
 macro-science or quantum physics. The scientific approach is tied to
 physical reality and deals exclusively with only three principal
  constituents: mass, energy, and velocity. Since nothing else is 
accessible
 by the scientific method, Science can make no valid assumptions about
 non-physical realities, such as Essence, awareness, or transcendence."

  It is my believe that existence is the playground for science. Indeed, 
science can never make valid assumptions about Essence, awareness or 
transcendence, but it can, and it does, about existence. Science is 
experimental, thus creating or shaping our existence. Experience may be 
an illusion, but then Science is the tool for understanding that 
illusion.
  Science is what we experience, so in my book, any metaphysics must 
obey the rules of science for its existential part.

 Moving ahead you say:

 "Why don't you challenge me with your disagreement
 on statements that do not involve the nothingness concept? (I'm still
 working on that concept, although I must warn you that the idea of
  'being-aware' as the primary dichotomy of existence now has more 
appeal to
 me than it did before we started discussing nothingness.)"

  I guess we still have a lot of ground to cover on other areas as well, 
but let's take them one step a time.

 You ask:
 "Do you care to tell me how you
 understand Value in your philosophical scheme?"

 I'm much obliged, although I know this will raise more discussion.
  I have a very mathematical approach of value. To put in I a bit of a 
MoQ perspective, for me value makes something static. Mathematical 
speaking; value makes something known, or constant.
  Value is the result of experiencing. In our separation from Essence 
we've created a duality of opposites. We've left the notion of 
completeness and oneness, and since we've done that we have to need to 
describe something that is no longer one or undifferentiated, and we 
have to distinguish it from it's surroundings since if we wouldn't do 
that it will be one and undifferentiated again. Value is what we place 
on a part of Essence of which we think it's separated from Essence.
  You see I don't put moral or ethical (or any) judgment on value. There 
is no higher or lower, more or less value.
 Valuing is acknowledging the differentiation of Essence.

 Well, that's my 2 cents for starters.

 Kind regards,
 Reinier.




___________________________________________________
Try the New Netscape Mail Today!
Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List
http://mail.netscape.com