[MD] extricating MOQ from SOM

[Heather Perella]

By the way Jim, Heather is my wife just so you know.

     [Jim]
> We don't say that a rock 'experiences'
> quality or that a rock is 'aware' of quality.  
> This is because it does not have a brain(duh), no
> brain, no SO split, no consciousness.  

     We could steer clear of these assumptions of a
rock having consciousness or not.

     [SA]
>   keeping this occurrence within human beings
> for simplicities sake,

     [Jim]
  I think our intellectual abilities evolved to
> serve the requirements of the lower
levels(biological,
> sociological) before becoming arguably dominant 
> sometime in recent history. 

     Are you saying here, that humans serving the
lower levels are thus dominant due to our humbling
service?  Are you saying stewardship is more of a
dominant behavior than say violence, ignorance against
the lower levels?

     [Jim]
> This brings me to my next point.  The intellect is
> capable of creating patterns (static quality).  I
> think 
> these could be referred to as thoughts and
> emotions(subject/object again, reason/feelings) 
> There 
> are two kinds of intellect, dynamic(present moment),
> and static(patterns created after the fact).  
> I think this is why in the East the brain is
> considered a sensory organ, because of the ability
> to both 
> experience reality, and to create static patterns or
> thoughts, even dreams.

     I definitely agree that the brain is just a
sensory organ.  As to the static patterns aspect of
the brain, well, those identifiers (static patterns)
of this world are just another sense.

     [Jim]
  It's all Subject/Object.  
> The intellect IS subject/object.  As Bodvar Skutnik
> states, 'object is reason and subject is feeling'.  
> This is the mind, totally!  You feel and you think,
> that's what your mind does.  Emotions are just as 
> much a cognitive function as is logic.  No brain, no
> emotions, no brain, no reason.

     Where does imagination fit in with your
subject-object distinctions?  Not quite understanding
how reason is object and feeling is subject?  Please
explain further.  What is object and what is subject? 
I know above you said I am subject, yet, if I keep
following your logic here, then reason is not me?

      [Jim]
> I think a lot of confusion comes from referring to
> SOM in the derogatory.  The point RP made with ZMM 
> was that we have a tendency, in our western culture,
> to cut ourselves off from the reality of the present
> moment.  We prefer not to see the present moment,
> instead, favoring the static patterns we created.  
> Essentially, living in denial(sounds like our
> predicament here in the US all right).  The problem
> with SOM is not looking at the world through the SO
lens, but
> looking at the world solely through the static SO 
> lens and denying the value of the dynamic lens.  He
> characterized this problem as the placement of 
> quality(I say reality) subordinate to Subject and
> Object instead of being the creator of the
> subject/object 
> split(in evolutionary terms).

     Do you mean, which I'm using what I understand
about quality as well, is that the primary reality is
not differentiated and going with that first, then
acknowledging that subject and object perspective will
occur, but we are not to think reality is split, it is
our intellect that is doing the splitting?  If so,
which you might have commented upon later in this
post, so I'll see, by I'm still wondering how you
might then account for this primary reality?  Couldn't
our perspective be noticed as of this primary reality,
instead of an subject/object secondary intellectual
account.  This secondary account that makes use of
subjects and objects then is imaginary, I believe, so
what is another imagination that the intellect can
project of the prime reality, instead.

     [Jim]
  A fair assessment,
> but it's easy to think that the problem is with
> Subject 
> and Object, not with the placement of reality, as
> the case seems to be.  there's nothing wrong with
> the 
> SO perspective, I argue that it is the only way we
> can experience reality. 

     So then, what's the big deal with the primary
reality, the placement of reality.  What kind of
outcome in knowing this placement occurs?  Wouldn't
this placement of reality feedback into our intellect
and we may dream a dream of primary reality?

     [Jim] 
>   In addition, I think RP pointed out the problem
> with the denial of subjectivity(or feeling), that
> comes with 
> the practice of objectivity(reason, logic, the
> scientific method).  But what he proved was that
> subjectivity 
> cannot be removed, it is an integral part of the
> scientific method.  Hypotheses don't come out of
> nowhere.  
> Objectivity and Subjectivity go hand in hand,
> essential, one to the other.

     I'm not ready to get rid of subject and objects
totality, but I'm still wondering if they are
necessary in practicing everyday life according to
what not the subject/object distinction says, but
according to what primary reality, that placement of
reality, and what ripples that movement would send
even into our intellect.


     [Jim]
> Reality exists independently of your mind but you
> can experience reality by being aware of it through
the
> use of your mind(it sounds patronizing I'm sorry, 
> I don't intend it to be, it's just one of those
> simple facts that when it's spelled out you think,
> 'why didn't I see that before?').

     I don't think your patronizing.  I just think
your thinking your way through this, spelling it out
as you say.

     [Jim]
> It's all a matter of perspective.  

     Yes, exactly, that's what I believe 'jumping out
of the S/O lens' is.  A matter of perspective.  I can
perceive from a subject object standpoint, but usually
in my everyday living, I'm not consciously recognizing
this is an object outside of me and I'm this subject
outside of that object and so forth.  I'm in this
state of being that isn't trying to clarify out-there
and in-there.  I could try to think like that, but
those thoughts are not coming into my head.  I'm not
visualizing subjects and objects, labeling everything
such.  Exactly, I find myself tied to a world where
distinctions are not so forth-coming.  Especially
working with people, I realize how what they do can
have me feel or think in a certain way.  Those
feelings and thoughts are triggered by what they do. 
They are touching me and my sensory brain.  Those
feelings and thoughts are coming off of them and
touching me.  So are those feelings and thoughts
distinctly me or them, I'd say neither, we depend on
each other for those feelings and thoughts.  It is a
world not just of a distinct subject and object.  It
is a world of subject and object coming together, as
you stated previously, and that coming together is
consciousness.  A conscious experience of a primary
reality.  I am experiencing a primary reality.  A?

      [Jim]
This implies that the brain is not a sensory organ (I
would like to 
believe it is) but more simply, a processor and
reconstructor of 
sensory data.  This would further imply that the
person that I refer to as 'me' is the accumulation of
all the qualities that go into who 
I am, physical, intellectual, memories, thoughts,
experiences, all 
wrapped up into one but no more.

     I would take it a step further and include your
brain as something accumulated by quality patterns. 
The brain is a sensory organ and
processor/reconstructor but what is building into this
processor and reconstructor?  What is building into
this sensory organ?  It is not a totality 'out-there'
building into what's 'in-here', in other words, it is
not everything is flowing into the brain making the
brain.  What I'm saying is that, oh, Marsha mentioned
this before and I like the term.  Marsha, what was
that term you used?  Not exchange between environment
and human being, not the word exchange, Marsha you
said it was something else?  I believe it is Arlo or
maybe Ian that use the word emerge, but I'm inclined
to use whatever Marsha said previously, but I can't
remember it.  Anyways, this view of the brain/mind is
a view that processes with the static patterns.  It is
more similar to our brain is dust.  Our mind is dust,
and then a bird sings and the mind is now more than
just dust, it is a bird singing.  The bird gets in our
head.  The bird is in this world.  The bird is here,
everywhere.  What is this dust?  It is just soil from
the trees.  Where am I in all of this?  I am a human
being, and this is what a human being can do.

     I look forward to further discussing this.  I
believe our discussing of this, is a stewing for me,
too.


Thanks,
SA


 
____________________________________________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.
http://new.mail.yahoo.com