[MD] Experience, essentialism, physicalism

[LARAMIE LOEWEN]

"I suspect that knowledge by acquaintance is not what it appears to be --  
that is, that the S/O picture we have (our glassy essence mirroring an 
external world) is not what is "really" going on. To put it another way, 
because we are fallen beings (we don't, or are not aware of having, this 
mystical Knowledge by Identity), we have an artificial separation, and so 
things appear to us as static knowledge of static things."

"Of course, I am deliberately pressing a pragmatic button here (I am 
affirming an appearance/reality distinction, which I think goes with the 
mystic territory). The thing that seems to be missing from this discussion 
about pragmatism, physicalism, and mysticism is what mystics (at least the 
ones I pay attention to) are saying. They deny physicalism. They accept the 
supernatural (where the "natural" is the sense-perceptible, what has 
microstructural explanations). They say that the natural is a manifestation 
of the supernatural, and so on. In sum, I trust these mystics (because I 
find what they say that I can understand to be rational), therefore I am not 
a physicalist. You are a physicalist, therefore you must reject what these 
mystics say."  -Scott


Dear Scott,

Dude, you've got like a giant intellect!  What's your understanding of Aurobindo's "Psychic Being" and "Supermind"?  Do you know of any western equivalent/s/?  DQ of the MOQ, perhaps?

Not necessary to respond, though it would be appreciated.

Cheers,
Larz