[MD] The SOM/MOQ discrepancy.

[MarshaV]

Greetings Ham,

I was just wondering if you, per chance, were taught rhetoric at the 
same schools as Alan Greenspan and Ben Bernanke?


Marsha



At 02:29 AM 12/13/2008, you wrote:

>Craig [Arlo mentioned]:
>
>
>>Let's recap (as Arlo would say).
>>You said: all LOGICAL propositions are based on
>>the relational system we call existence.
>>I said: EMPIRICAL propositions.
>>You replied: ALL propositions, EXCEPT (drum roll)
>>a LOGICAL proposition (A=A).
>>Your position is confusing.
>
>I don't see the confusion.  The expression "A = A" defines an 
>identity, not a relation, so it's not really a logical 
>proposition.  I used it only to demonstrate that propositions are in 
>the form of "A causes B" or "1 + 2 = 3" or "if  this, then 
>that".  In other words, they express relational possibilities, 
>effects, axioms, etc., all of which involve differentiated entities 
>or integers.  The absolute (Essence) is non-relational and 
>undifferentiated, so it lies outside the category of logical propositions.
>
>[Ham]:
>>...scientists and geneticists...explain the process [of consciousness]
>>in terms of biological evolution.  But that's "cause-and-effect",
>>the experiential worldview of empiricism, not philosophy.
>
>[Craig]:
>>Yes, consciousness must be explained as an experience.
>>How else?
>
>Consciousness is often DESCRIBED as "intellect", "mind", or 
>"sensibility" which emerges in the process of evolution.  But since 
>the capacity of conscious awareness is not a process, and 
>consciousness itself is not an 'existent", we can't explain it as a 
>biological event.  Arlo refuses to accept anything as valid that is 
>not empirically experienced.  Only existents are real for him, so he 
>denies the subjective self and the possibility of a reality that 
>transcends finite existence.  Since that makes it impossible to 
>explain anything in metaphysical terms, he accuses me of refusing to 
>define awareness and Essence as processes in time.  If Value 
>(Quality) had not been equated to Experience by Pirsig, I suspect he 
>would be denying that, too.
>
>I hope your mind is not also closed to metaphysical theory, Craig, 
>although your "confusion" over my positon is not every encouraging.
>
>Regards,
>Ham
>
>Moq_Discuss mailing list
>Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
>http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
>Archives:
>http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
>http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/

.
.

Shoot for the moon.  Even if you miss, you'll land among the stars.........
.
.