[MD] Distinguishing Levels (Individual level)

[David M]

Ham

How is it that we find ourselves in the position
to make choices? Do we determine the laws of
nature (NB: devil's advocate question)?

David M

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ham Priday" <hampday1 at verizon.net>
To: <moq_discuss at moqtalk.org>
Sent: Wednesday, June 07, 2006 7:10 AM
Subject: Re: [MD] Distinguishing Levels (Individual level)


>
> Hi David -- 
>
>> You say: the experienced world begins and ends with the individual.
>>
>> Well you could say that, us Pirsig folk say reality=experience
>> so that implies something similar about the individual.
>> But is the individual a ground of experience or something
>> that is discovered in experience. In terms of self-awareness
>> I would argue the latter. Is not the m/other experienced prior
>> to any self-awareness we may develop?-just for starters.
>
> I would say that the individual is the "subject" of experience, since
> "ground" implies root cause or essence, and the individual is neither of
> these.  However, I realize that you "Pirsig folk" don't like 
> subject/object
> dualism but would rather talk in the language of levels and patterns.  In
> deference to this concept, I've been using "dichotomy" in my posts.
> Webster's Collegiate defines "dualism" as "a theory that considers reality
> to consist of two irreducible elements or modes," but it cites "duality" 
> and
> "dichotomy" as synonyms.
>
> Inasmuch as all difference starts with a separation of unity, duality may 
> be
> considered the first order of differentiation.  That anyone can question 
> the
> empirical fact that existential reality is differentiated is astonishing 
> to
> me.  Almost as astonishing, and metaphysically unsound, is the dismissal 
> of
> subjective awareness as the primary "interpreter" of reality.  I find it
> frustrating to talk philosophy with people who refuse to acknowledge the
> free interaction of the individual subject with its objects, but speak of
> intellect, thoughts and feelings as a collective realm of the biosphere
> which human beings "latch onto" at the appropriate stage of their 
> evolution.
>
> Now, as to your second question, I believe that self-awareness emerges
> gradually from a series of pre-natal sensations that have been integrated
> into conscious memory.  These somatic sensations -- pain, irritation,
> discomfort, etc.-- interrupt the homeostatic tranquility of the fetus and
> are eventually linked together as the content (sensibilia) of its 
> awareness
> continuum.   But I also believe that proprietary sensibility is present as 
> a
> "potentiality" even before such experience is registered in consciousness.
> This leads to my theory of nothingness, which is beyond the scope of your
> question.  However, it does reveal my basic departure from Pirsig's MoQ, 
> in
> that all experience, all knowledge, all value is proprietary to the
> individual.
>
> In valuistic terms, reality is unique for each of us.  It is this 
> principle
> which makes the individual autonomous and gives meaning to human 
> existence.
> As I see it, man is the value detector and choicemaker of existence.  He
> creates his own reality from the self/other dichotomy, but neither he nor
> biological evolution creates the dichotomy responsible for his awareness.
> The rejection of proprietary awareness and the absence of a transcendant
> source IMO leave major holes in Pirsig's philosophy.
>
> Nice to hear from you again, David.  I hope I've answered your "starter"
> questions.
>
> Best regards,
> Ham
>
>
> 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/
>