[MD] confused(I hope you don't mind)

Ham Priday hampday1 at verizon.net
Thu Oct 26 12:35:08 PDT 2006


Hey, Ron [SA mentioned] --


Thanks for the Wikipedia quote on Mind, but I know SA's mind, and it won't
accept word definitions for concepts.

For some reason -- probably the influence of ZEN -- he feels that
definitions "objectify" values that are best sensed holistically, as when
contemplating the oneness of Nature.  And that is true as a pantheistic
ideology.  We do objectify values in common experience as a normal function
of the human intellect.  That's how we interrelate and communicate  with
each other as human beings.  What SA doesn't appreciate is that Philosophy
serves to explain reality.  We can only explain it in words, and if the
words are ambiguous or  mean different things to different people, the
concept may go misunderstood.

I was intrigued by your original background reference on the adage "The
proof is in the pudding":

"Word Detective and other etymology sites pointed out that the phrase
originated as 'the proof of the pudding is in the eating.' It means that the
true value or quality of something can only be judged when it's put to use.
The meaning is often summed up as 'results are what count.'

According to Bartlett's Familiar Quotations, the phrase dates back to at
least 1615 when Miguel de Cervantes published Don Quixote. In this comic
novel, the phrase is stated as, 'The proof of the pudding is the eating'."

This is significant conceptually, because it demonstrates that value (or
quality) is sensed directly -- prior to its being objectivized by the
intellect.  Value is a psycho-emotional realization that preempts reason.
Thus, the value of a pudding is in the tasting.  The value of a symphony is
in the hearing.  The value of a sunset is in the viewing.  And the value of
a concept is in the understanding (or realization).  As an essentialist, I
would add that the value of Essence is in the awareness.  And, as SA would
have it, being-aware is pre-intellectual consciousness.  So, my preference
for Webster's second definition of Mind seems to be right on target: "the st
ate of being characterized by sensation, emotion, volition, and thought."

What do you think?

Regards,
Ham




More information about the Moq_Discuss mailing list