[MD] Quick one: causation

MarshaV marshalz at charter.net
Tue Jan 20 08:45:00 PST 2009


At 09:38 AM 1/20/2009, you wrote:
> >Marsha
> >In this statement there seems to be a strong sense of independent
> >self along with the TiT. Do you not see this or is this independent
> >self also something that you think inherently exists?
> >
> >[Krimel]
> >I really don't even understand the question. What do you mean by
> >"independent"? Would that be something that has no relationship to anything
> >but itself? Nor do I know what you mean by "inherently exists" would that
>be
> >like something that pulled itself up by its own bootstaps? I don't think
> >either of these have anything to do with what Kant was talking about.
> >
> >As Pirsig discusses it, Kant is saying that all we have access to is the
> >evidence of our senses, formatted in such a way as to allow us to create
> >meaning. We do not have direct experience of an external world. I agree but
> >do not think this means that our senses arise independently or that our
> >sense have "inherent existence". I think there is a distinction between my
> >sense impressions and the interplay of physical energies that give rise to
> >them. Experience is a process not a thing. Like most of "reality" it is a
> >verb not a noun.
>
>[Marsha]
>Without all the but, but, buts...  Not dependent; not depending or
>contingent upon something else for existence, operation, etc.
>
>[Krimel]
>Ok, I think I get it and I thing the very idea is absurb.
>
>[Marsha]
>When an entity or operation is dependent on other, then it is like
>nested Russian dolls.  More so because it spreads like the net of
>jewels.  Only mind can artificially make a stop relative to its needs
>or expectations.
>
>[Krimel]
>Nested Russian dolls, billiard balls on a pool table each "thing" or
>"thought" or "process" stands in relationship to other "things", "thoughts"
>or "processes"
>
>[Marsha]
>Mind creates illusionary boundaries.  This framing
>may be useful, for science as an example, but is ILLUSION.
>
>[Krimel]
>The mind detects patterns and creates meaning. (Meaning in the sense of
>reduction in uncertainty)

[Marsha]

The spov have conventional ready-made boundaries with ready-made meaning.


>I could be wrong but I think you have a mistaken
>idea of what an "illusion" is.

For the unaware human being a pot is an independent object.   I 
understand, in spite of acculturation, that there are no independent 
objects.  And that entities exist by convention and are better 
represented as patterns, ever-changing, interrelated, mutually 
dependent static patterns of value,


>  I would claim that it is a particular way of
>organizing sense data into perception. It is a form of meaning. We are
>beings that do this. We can not stop. We can shift illusions and create a
>different set of meaning out of our sense data. This is what happened as a
>result of the Copernican Revolution. It created a new illusion that called
>for everyone to change the way they organized their perception of the world.
>The sense data was unchanged but the perception was completely different.

This may be a conventional and comfortable way for you to understand reality.



>An illusion is not a fantasy or a mirage or in any sense unreal.

I mean illusion as in mistaken identity, like something having 
independent existence when it does not have independent existence.


>  It is not trivial. Whatever meaning you derive from the world is 
> an illusion. You can
>trade one illusion for another but you can not avoid buying into some
>illusion or another.

Ahhh yes, even emptiness is empty of inherent existence.   Chop wood, 
carry water.


>
>[Marsha]
>Subjects and objects are a process not self and thing.
>
>[Krimel]
>When have I ever suggested otherwise?

You wrote, "Experience is a process not a thing. Like most of 
"reality" it is a verb not a noun."   I thought it was clearer to 
state, "Subjects and objects are a process not self and thing."


Marsha





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.
.
.





More information about the Moq_Discuss mailing list