[MD] Chaos

[Heather Perella]

     [Ham]
> I don't subscribe to either theory.  While it may be
> aesthetically pleasing
> to consider relational order an innate "force" in
> the universe, such a
> notion makes the creation of subjective
> consciousness totally dependent on
> an objective reality.  


     "...such a notion makes the creation of
subjective consciousness totally dependent on an
objective reality."  I'm particularly looking at this
statement, which further on in this post didn't really
jump out at me, until I read this as follows:

     [Ham]
> The antithesis of
> physical reality is no reality -- nothingness --
> which is what pure
> awareness is without its object.

     So, why Ham, are you denying what you wrote in
the statement above, when you say this here.  What is
reality?  Are you saying reality is nothingness and
'physical reality', which I quote the latter for I'm
not getting into the gumption traps fully loaded with
that, but understanding your position, you deny
"...subjective consciousness totally DEPENDENT upon
objective reality."  but then you state nothingness is
awareness, which you need awareness in your thesis. 
Unless, at this point, your perspective is only
talking essence, which isn't any of this, but is all
of this, before the negations begin, etc...  

    please clarify.

snow falling again, birds eatin' seed at the tree,
SA



 
____________________________________________________________________________________
Any questions? Get answers on any topic at www.Answers.yahoo.com.  Try it now.