[MD] The Science of Red

[MarshaV]

Hi Ron,

Yea, Nietzsche is nifty.  I liked 'On Truth and Lies in an Nonmoral 
Sense'.  Ruthlessly honest.

My point was that science cannot tell us anything about the mystical 
_experience_.  I praised dmb's post because I thought that was what 
he was pointing to.  Religion and science share the same tendency 
towards reification, and miss the point.  First hand experience does 
not equal secondhand description.  IMHO

Marsha






At 08:59 AM 2/4/2009, you wrote:
>Hi Marsha,
>Loved tragic age of the greeks by the way, science deals with explainations.
>science extracts concepts which are verifyable with experience in universal
>terms. We all may experience red if one has eyes that respond to light, but
>we all respond differently to that experience, how relational patterns connect
>to our unique experiences shape the personal experience of red.
>Associative experiences define the relation of the experience. Therefore
>red is not merely a frequency of particles behaving in waves, it is 
>the reaction
>of those particles and interaction which give red its phenomena along
>with our relational experience of that phenomena.
>science may explain the phenomena of color but it does not explain
>the experience. Science functions on universals.  its explanitory
>power is thus limited to those experiences that are universally verifyable.
>
>-Ron
>
>
>
>
>________________________________
>From: MarshaV <marshalz at charter.net>
>To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
>Sent: Wednesday, February 4, 2009 8:30:42 AM
>Subject: Re: [MD] The Science of Red
>
>At 07:47 AM 2/4/2009, you wrote:
> > Hi Marsha,
> >
> >
> >> It seems to me, religions reify experience into religious objects.
> >> Science reifies experience into scientific objects.  The MOQ 
> seems to point to the merit of the actual experience, and the 
> experience prior to concepts.
> >
> > I'm not sure I understand what the point of this thread is. Are 
> there questions you have about the experience of red? You seem to 
> be unimpressed by the answers Krimel presented that science has 
> about red, but you haven't asked any questions beyond, what does 
> science say about red?
> >
> > Best,
> > Steve
>
>Greetings Steve,
>
>My question was about what science tells us about the _experience_ 
>of red.  This was just an auxiliary question.  The primary question 
>was also about _experience_:  'It is my impression that the mystical 
>experience is without self and objects, in the land before 
>language.  How does science deal with that?'
>
>Not to worry.  I'm perfectly willing to let the subject drop.  I can 
>ponder it on my own time.
>
>
>Marsha
>
>
>
>
>
>
>_____________
>
>QUESTION EVERYTHING!!!
>
>
>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/
>
>
>
>
>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/


_____________

QUESTION EVERYTHING!!!