[MD] Consciousness a la Platt

[Heather Perella]

SA previously:
> >     You've got to admit it's funny.

Platt:
> I guess if you are that much into computers, it's
> mildly funny. What's 
> really funny is neither Krimel or Arlo can answer the
> questions. Well, not 
> funny maybe. Sad. Note that a key question was deliberately
> omitted: Why do 
> you think "spontaneously arise" is any different
> than "oops." 
> What do you think the difference is?


SA:  When I think of "oops", I think about "aha", since these are concepts on this forum that are supposed to contrast each other.  With "oops", and I'm not going to use these terms, maybe, the same way others do or how their static patterns have been formalized on this forum, but to continue, with "oops" it sounds like something was present and then a fumble or tricky occurred and it was a mistake.  With "aha", it sounds as if 'something' was present and then somebody else realized this already present 'something' or "aha" might also mean events came together in such a way that something new is realized, so, whether this something new being realized was already present or old patterns are being tossed out for new dynamic patterns, thus, these new patterns can't be specifically pointed out to have already been present, they are new.  Unless, we are talking about people where one person is realizing what another person already realized and thus this new
 realization, this "aha", is just new to one person, not the other person.  Also, we're trying to decipher sounds that are not very formalized as to having definitions:  "aha" or "oops", so, in the context of this forum where "aha" and "oops" have come to mean something specifically - I'm not up to the task for I find neither to be helpful.  Now, I do like "spontaneously arise", but this is something I've personally valued and I've cultivated meaning for this concept in a way that may differ from what others think of it.
     Spontaneity is playful and fun.  It is trickery without the "oops" inclination of connotating some kind of mistake was made in the process.  Spontaneity is wild.  It is act given the freedom, the proper circumstances to occur from the inside-out.  The natural inclination of the event is able to go without impediment.  For instance, a rock rolls down hill and spontaneously a rainstorm has eroded enough soil around this rock to loose the rock from the hillside and the rock falls downhill.  It has rained many times before, but it so happens that the rock was loosened on this day.  Sure physics is involved, and we find structure and order - rocks gravitate down - but on this day?  Sure we could measure how much rain it would have taken to loosen the soil and the rock would have to have fallen this day if the known amount of rain would fall.  Spontaneity doesn't deny order and structure exists.  What is spontaneous about this rock falling, was I didn't
 have the measurements, it just fell one rainy day.  One or the other doesn't need to win out, spontaneity or order, that's an SOM limitation.  So I'm not going to get into that, it's too ugly and boring.  What's beautiful about spontaneity is forces can counter flowers from blooming, such as winter, but one spring day, when the sun is warm, the flowers bloom in many places with yellows over here, and red ones over here.  Fire could come and counter this or human's could develop something to counter what flowers will naturally do on a warm spring's day, and this would take away the spontaneity of flower's blooming.  Flower's do this on their own, and freedom, this 'on their own' is also an important attribute of what 'spontaneity is'.  One could say humans are spontaneous in their destruction of flowers blooming, and it is the way of humans but then again, I believe humans in their ways are innocent enough that we still need cultivation and learning to
 help incline our ways and thus, a gardener will be inclined to naturally and spontaneously cultivate flowers whereas a bulldozer operator building a road will be inclined to rid these flowers to put the road in, it is the spontaneous nature of a bulldozer operator.  What of the bulldozer operator that goes home to be a gardener?  Well, at home he or she is a gardener and at work a bulldozer operator.
     Whether we like "oops", "aha", or spontaneity, has to do with how we define such concepts, also, it is what we are trying to incline, what we are trying to point out deep down.  For instance, why is it important that we may use "aha" and not "oops" or vice versa.  What's the difference?  What are we really trying to say, that "aha" or "oops" may or may not be readily defining, I guess what I'm saying is instead of "aha" or "oops" one might say, "in other words what I mean is..."
     


woods,
SA