[MD] atheistic and content

[Ham Priday]

Hi Marsha --



> This "subjective agent" when looked for cannot be found.  There is 
> experience as awareness, but all that can be said or thought about  such 
> awareness it is not: not this, not that.  I do not know how an 
> explanation of such awareness can ever be true.  Quality, as  unknowable, 
> indivisable and undefinable, seems the best we can say;
> it is pure experience.
>
> Your posts, of all, drive me tongue twisted.

That's interesting, Marsha, because I find your posts verbally twisted.  And 
that leads to conceptual confusion.  For example, "there is experience as 
awareness" implies that there is also experience that is not awareness. 
Have you ever had an experience that you were not aware of?  (I'll assume 
the answer is no.)  Experience is the content of conscious (subjective) 
awareness.  You cannot have one without the other.  And you don't have to 
"look for" the subject: it is YOU, the Knower of your experience.

"Not this, not that" is how we describe undefined or "unknown" phenomena. 
How can you call the Knower an "unknown"?  Awareness is the subjective locus 
of all experience and the knowledge derived from it.  All experience --  
including its relative Quality or Value -- is dependent on the cognizant 
subject of our relational world.  WE are the agents who bring Value into 
being.  Without awareness there is no experience, hence no being and no 
knowledge.

I can appreciate that this concept is mind-twisting to a staunch Pirsigian. 
But if you understand what I'm saying, and reflect on it for a moment or 
two, perhaps it will help to untwist your tongue.  It certainly should 
straighten out your epistemology.  If I'm right, it will be evident in your 
next epistle.

Good luck and thanks, Marsha.

Essentially yours,
Ham