[MD] Experience, essentialism, physicalism

[LARAMIE LOEWEN]

Scott,

What's the definition of "physicalism"?

Larz
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Scott Roberts<mailto:jse885 at localnet.com> 
  To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org<mailto:moq_discuss at moqtalk.org> 
  Sent: Saturday, March 11, 2006 7:48 PM
  Subject: Re: [MD] Experience, essentialism, physicalism


  DMB,

  Scott said to Matt:
  ...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.

  dmb says:
  Missing from the discussion? But the MOQ is a philsophical mysticism that
  denies physicalism and I believe I've been pointing that out. I would also
  object to the notion that mystics accept the supernatural, unless by
  "supernatural" you mean "extremely natural".

  Scott:
  Yes you did say it denies physicalism, but I was referring to that and to 
  the reality of the supernatural. But if the MOQ denies physicalism, why is 
  it that physicalists such as Ian say they accept the MOQ? I would say that 
  they can because of the way that Pirsig has organized the static levels: 
  biological building on the physical, etc. He has put the material as a 
  substrate to the mental, which is what physicalists do. This is the reason 
  why I have accused the MOQ of being little more than materialism plus DQ. 
  Pirsig sees the MOQ as compatible with Darwinism. Merrell-Wolff rejects 
  Darwinism. Mystics tend to say things like the physical is precipitated from 
  the non-physical. (There are exceptions: Teilhard de Chardin might be one. 
  But I think they are just too locked in to today's secular intellectual 
  marketplace.)

  By supernatural I mean saying that there is reality beyond our familiar 
  spatiotemporal lives and environment. If space and time are products of 
  consciousness, then consciousness is supernatural. It survives death since 
  it creates biological life. Merrell-Wolff says we are immortal. Aurobindo 
  speaks of levels of higher mind from which matter was formed. This sort of 
  talk is, according to the usual philosophical vocabulaly, supernatural.

  - Scott 

  moq_discuss mailing list
  Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
  http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org<http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org>
  Archives:
  http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/<http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/>
  http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/<http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/>