[MD] Consciousness (explained?)

[Ham Priday]

Dear old Bo --



> MOQ postulates that the ruling Western World View is
> the Subject/Object - aka Mind/Matter (abbreviated SOM).
> You postulate that the S/O split (or in your lingo between
> the Sensible Agent and its Awareness) is no "world view"
> because it is reality itself - existence's deepest ground.
> Is that right?  It must be possible to smoke you out.

I know that in your own mind this analysis makes sense, or at least enough 
sense to "smoke me out".  I also know that you would have dispensed with me 
long ago if this topic was not important to you.  But you must realize that 
I have to deal with your lingo, too, and what you've written does not 
accurately represent my view.  You and I are coming at Reality from two 
different points of view.  What we need is a common language to communicate 
our respective views in a way that is comprehensible to both of us.  Since I 
can only communicate in English, I suggest that we each try to articulate 
our ontology in the simplest terms, using analogies and examples when 
necessary for understanding.

Let me start by revising your statement above to express what I actually 
believe (minus the "special lingo"):

Pirsig postulates that the universal notion of reality is a Subject/Object 
paradigm, which is to say, a mind relating to matter.  (He has called this 
universal notion "SOM", despite the fact that it is neither metaphysics nor 
a metaphysical theory, but simply a common precept drawn from experience.) 
Ham maintains that the S/O division is what we all call Existence.  (This is 
an observation, not a "postulation".)   The Subject of Existence is 
Awareness (also referred to as "value-sensibility" or "agent").  The Object 
of Existence is Being (also referred to as experiential "phenomena", 
"finitude", "things and events" and "otherness", together with their 
properties and attributes).  In Ham's ontology Subject and Object are 
mutually dependent contingencies which, within the experiential framework of 
space/time, constitute man's "worldview" of reality.  Reality itself, 
however, is not divided into subjects and objects, awareness and beingness, 
or things and events occurring in time and space.  Ultimate Reality is the 
absolute and self-sufficient "ground" of all created being.

Now, if you will be kind enough to provide a similar paradigm for your SOL, 
we should have the basis for a comprehensible and possibly even productive 
dialogue.  If you can do this without resorting to Pirsigian terms, so much 
the better.  ("Static", "dynamic", "pre-intellectual" and "patterns", as the 
author uses them, only confuses me anyway.)

Thanks, Bo.  Understanding your "worldview" is important to me, also.

Essentially yours,
Ham