[MD] The Dynamics of Value

[118]

Hi Ham,
Thanks for the explanation below, I read that on your website.  It may have
been a little different.  Yet, the click is not there.  While it subscribes
to absoluteness, it is still firmly grounded in materialism.

There is no concern about loss of selfness here, because I see such a thing
as impossible.  It certainly would not be consistent with the laws of
physics, or the intuitive laws that are presented to me.  Perhaps I have
reached the self in a different way than you.  Your interpretation works
from the objective point of view, but not from the subjective.  It would
describe the sensibility of others but not of the self.

There still seems to be a flash necessary for subjective involvement in your
ontology.  I do not think such a spark necessary.  It doesn't need to be.
 However, from that spark of selfness onward, your ontology is certainly
consistent.

Thanks,
Mark

>
>
> Yes, negated self-identity is lost; remember, however, that the Sensibility
> and Value that ignites this flash are both derived from Essence.  Remember,
> too, that whatever essentially IS, is ABSOLUTELY.  Inasmuch as sensibility
> is essential, the value that you realize incrementally in this
> life-experience cannot be lost but represents your singular "value
> complement" in the Absolute Oneness of Essence.
>
> Thus, to quote Ham from the online thesis ...
>
> "Having rounded the negate cycle, the individuated self surrenders its
> 'I'-ness -conditional being and existential awareness - completely to
> otherness, thereby revoking its negated status and reclaiming its
> essent-value.  For each of us, the act of dying represents the supreme
> sacrifice because it terminates the egocentricity needed for the continuity
> of individuated "selfness" through its transitory existence."
>
> Since concern about "loss of selfness" accounts for most of the dread
> associated with death, it behooves us to remember that the truly meaningful
> experiences and greatest joys in life are those in which we lose ourselves.
>
> As you see, I've opted for "Treat", Mark.  And, it may boost your ego to
> know that to your credit I have personally expounded more of my philosophy
> to you than to any other participant in this forum.
>
> Congratulations and essentially yours,
> Ham
>
>