[MD] The Quality of Freedom

[Ham Priday]

Arlo --



> [Ham]
> You see, Arlo, you are stuck in the time warp of causality and are 
> continually trying to "rephrase" my ontogeny in temporal terms.
>
> [Arlo]
> Not at all. I am trying to understand how your ontology accounts for the 
> appearance of "man's cognitive faculties" in the cosmos. You seem to be 
> okay with the statement "Well, it is here, that's all that's important". 
> To me, understanding better how/why it got here is much more interesting, 
> and telling.  And that you seem to absolve "philosophy" of any 
> responsibility to account for the man's observations, is strange.

As a logical progression, creation must get from point A through point B in 
order to reach point C.  From a temporal, species-oriented standpoint 
"evolution moved" organic life forms from single-celled organisms and plants 
to insects, reptiles, birds, and mammals, from which the primates evolved to 
Homo-sapiens.  One could say that the entire process had the creation of man 
as its "goal".  But that would be an intellectual construct which doesn't 
explain conscious awareness, sensibility, or intellection.

> Also, since you consider man's cognitive faculties an "essent", would you 
> also consider the cognitive faculties of apes also "essents"?

Whatever cognitive capability apes possess is a non-objective derivative of 
Essence, hence falls into the "essent" category.

> Believe me, I do understand why you refuse to enter this arena,
> and I don't think its to serve "philosophy".

It must be my self-serving strategy to expose Arlo as an objectivist.

You're welcome,
Ham