[MD] False Messiah

[Heather Perella]

Scott, Peter, Larz, and all,

     Scott said:  "Neo-Darwinism assumes that space
and time are fundamental -- in apparent contradiction
to quantum physics. Mystics say that space and time
are not fundamental. So if I listen to mystics and a
neo-Darwinist listens to Dawkins, who is being more
irrational?"
     "It is impossible to imagine in one's mind's eye
the non-spatiotemporal, yet quantum physics demands it
-- or rather, it demands that one face the fact that
quantum reality is not understandable in this "mind's
eye" manner."

     Since you seem to know what you are talking about
here, please explain.  What do you mean quantum
physics doesn't recognize space-time?  Do you mean
because it has not yet come together with Einsteins
theories dealing with gravity?  I understand that
mystics and quantum physics are on the same page when
it comes to space time.  I am just not keen on the
non-spatiotemporality in quantum physics that you are
referring to. 

     Peter said:  "As an atheist I recognize that I
have assumed moral responsibility for myself and my
actions but how do I measure my morality if it is
ultimately subjective? Perhaps it's based on how many
spandrels I produce or whether they are persistent
spandrels."

     Spandrels are a very real structure and
space-time 'thing', yet, it is a  very general
understanding.  Do you mean in this above question and
answer that once spandrels on the level (or event) of
morality become plenty enough then they are no longer
undefined and thus, not of the realm of faith but of
reason and thus, definable? (I don't think this is
really a level, but I am having a hard time placing
your question-answer onto a level without jumping into
a SOM, since you brought up 'ultimately subjective'.)
     If faith is something undefined, then faith is
very dynamic quality, and a source of creativity. 
Reason would not create something or be able to even
creatively apply imaginative insight to become
something reasoned.  Reason defines but is not the
searcher of eventual definition.  Reason is a
solution, but not the lines drawn to make the
solution.  Reason thinks stuff through, but that is
all an application of faith, until, the creativity
stops and nothing more needs induced or deduced into
'what it is' because it has become static, literal,
and something that is defined and known as this or
that and nothing else.  Nothing else, unless, other
information (found in the realm of spandrels) may
pile-up enough and it becomes something irrational,
unreasoned, and more thought and imagination, by us,
is an effort of intellectualism to use not just 'faith
in thinking we can find a reasonable understanding',
but the use and balance of the power of reason, as
well.  'Things' are shuffled about in a creative,
organized fashion to understand all this newly
surfaced DQ coming out of the 'woodwork' and amidst
the space-time of spandrels.  (notice the merger of
'things' being shuffled about in a creative [faith],
organized [reason] fashion.  What is shuffling? 
Intellect)  
     DQ and spandrels?  I would say spandrels might be
where static and dynamic qualities merge and Quality
is known for what it is in its' entirety.  Maybe? 

     Laramie Loewen said:  "Upon re-reading Lila I was
left with the feeling that a whole level is missing
from the MOQ.  Perhaps the missing level has just been
built, or we are constructing it right now..." 

     What level do you notice being built or
constructed now and thus was missing from Lila?  Might
you be able to hint to this level, if it is not very
well defined as of now?

Thanks all,
SA



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com