[MD] differences between MoQ and SOM

[MarshaV]

At 04:16 PM 10/24/2008, Ham wrote:

Just a quick interjection...


>What you seem to be aiming at is a teleology for the behavior of 
>inanimate objects and events.  That's commendable, but it's a 
>different concept than claiming that rocks and trees "value" their 
>natural goals and ends.  There is a certain "determinism" to the 
>universe in that it's self-sustaining and directed toward the 
>production of viable life forms.

The Universe is uncaused, like a net of jewels in which each is a 
reflection of all the others in a fantastic, interrelated harmony 
without end.  The operative word is 'interrelated'.  It is not 
self-sustaining.  And it directed towards dynamic quality.



>What I'm saying is that experience literally CREATES what we see, 
>touch, and feel, and all the properties and laws of existence are 
>intellectualized from that experience.  This is what I call 
>proprietary awareness, and it starts with the "value of otherness" 
>which is the locus of self-awareness to which all human beings are 
>sensible.  In fact, "being aware" is the individual's fundamental 
>sense of value.  Which means that the relational values that one 
>experiences as emotional feelings - awe, joy, moral goodness (or 
>evil) are all constructs of our value sensibility.  To make sense of 
>these emotions, the brain and central nervous system integrates 
>organic sensation into a systematic whole which is our 
>worldview.  Except for our individuated (space/time) perspective, 
>this view of a physical universe is the same for everybody, because 
>the value we sense is derived from the same essential source.

Experience (Quality) creates both objects and subjects.  It's co-relational.

Sorry to interrupt.


Marsha






.
.

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