[MD] subject / object logic

[Ham Priday]

Hi Platt --

[Ham, previously]:
> For purposes of clarity, I prefer the term "sensibility" where the precise
> locus of awareness is questionable, the absolute case being that of no 
> locus
> at all, such as the nature of the primary source (i.e, creator or God). 
> In
> my philosophy of Essence, existence is postulated as a duality in which
> sensibility (the negate) is separated from an insensible otherness 
> (essent).
> To refer to the negate as "awareness" would be confusing and
> epistemologically incorrect, since in its primary state it is not 
> individuated
> as a cognizant organism.  When individuation of the self arises (and we
> understand it as a process in time) it becomes what I call 
> "value-sensibility",
> which is always experienced differentially.
> (Incidentally, so is Value, in my opinion.)

[Platt]:
> I wonder where "consciousness" fits into your description above.

The way I look at it, Sensibility is primary to self-consciousness 
(proprietary awareness), intellection, and experience.
Merriam Webster defines "consciousness" as the "quality or state of being 
aware, especially of something within oneself."  Wherever there is 
"awareness of something" you have a subject conscious of an object.  That 
holds true even if the something is a pain in your stomach.  Pure 
Sensibility, on the other hand (which I maintain is the "core self") has 
only the Value of Essence as its object.   We do not experience Essence 
directly but as a sense of value.  Consciousness (neuro-sensory awareness) 
intellectualizes value differentially, and we experience it as being in 
space/time.

> Is it the same as "sensibility?" Is "essent" conscious in any way?

Sensibility at any level infers a metaphysical source.  In my philosophy, 
Essence is absolute Sensibility (esthesis), from which all differentiated 
"feeling" (i.e., awareness, consciousness, experience) is derived. 
However, there is a difference between sensibility in, say, an amoeba, which 
is a behaviorial response of the organism, and "owned" or subjective 
sensation which is proprietary to the individual.

> And is my cat, UTOE, a self-aware "cognizant individuated organism"
> with "value-sensibility?"

I recall having discussed UTOE's cognizant capabilities at some length with 
you before.  While this remains largely a matter of semantics, cats, dogs, 
and apes exhibit varying degrees of self-consciousness.  I tend to associate 
"cognizance" with "intellectual understanding", which for household pets is 
minimal in my view.

A recent Newsweek feature on animal intelligence says that primatologist 
Frans de Waal, et al, have concluded that only animals that are aware of 
themselves are capable of the empathy toward other creatures which denotes 
value sensibility.  One of the "experiments" used to determine 
self-consciousness puts the animal in front of a mirror.  If it  shows 
evidence of recognizing the image in the mirror as "its own", this is 
assumed to be a demonstration of self-consciousness.  I tried this a few 
times with my cat (now deceased), but he sniffed a couple of times and 
turned away.  (Of course, the animal's owner can always claim that it 
already knows this is a reflection and quickly seeks a more "stimulating" 
object.)  But you might try it with UTOE and let us know the results.

 Thanks for the questions, Platt, and my fondest regards to UTOE,.
--Ham