[MD] Is this the inadequacy of the MOQ?

[rapsncows at fastmail.fm]

Alexander,
my reply,
Tim



> **Alexander**
> 
> But what, then, is the interpreter?

[Tim]
right!  If I could have answered that I would have told you that I have
THE metaphysics... and probably also the Physics to back it up.

I was talking with Marsh about ultimate truth, and I argued that it is
'a thing, qua thing."  then I saw a post from John Carl, titled
something about 'pragmatism', oh yea, and the plains indians; he re-drew
my attention to the end of 'Lila', last paragraph, "good is a noun". 
maybe there is something here...

> [Alexander] I wrote in an offshoot from this
> discussion about the difference between consciousness and conscious
> experience.  "Cogito ergo sum" is invalid, because consciousness isn't
> what
> thinks, but what listens to the thought.

[Tim]
I think you are onto something here.  And I also think that if we
'follow our noses' (like a math teacher once used to say) we might get
somewhere.  (It is often what we 'know' beyond our nose that causes us
to veer too soon.)

> [Alexander] So this thought which says "I
> think, thus I am" is an intellectual pattern of experience - quality if
> you
> like.
> But you can't really say what this consciousness is, because it seem
> somehow
> to be generated by the central nervous system.

[Tim]
perhaps I have a different perspective on mind/matter here.  When I
think of a CNS, I am thinking, at least at the moment, of a composite of
two intertwined patterns.  There is a material pattern, and a mental map
(it is the intertwining of these by the, or into the, faithful I, that
seems to be progress for me, now).  Anyway, I am thinking of the
patterns of the MoQ this way.  Specifically, the inorganic and
biological here, have a material AND a mental component (the brain
itself is material).  In speaking with Marsha I have used the word
miracle.  What permits a will of the faithful I to animate matter? 
Anyway, I see a 'process', wherein, for instance, the thinking I (with
his mental map) will consider and decide ... and the material I will be
compelled to movement.  This is so whether it is inorganic
mental/material patterns, or biological, or other. Granted, those
'lower' are mainly 'sub-conscious', but this just suggests strength in
the idea of some 'interpreter'.  The process could go the other way,
from material to mental.  But that the process works is the
extraordinary part - to me.

> [Alexander] But this invariant "self"
> is
> really a not-I, when it isn't filled up with experience.

[Tim]
I might have used 'not-I' this way not too long ago.  But now I am
thinking that in the process between mental and material, there is a
faithful I, and there are then two processes (executed faithfully,
somehow: by the good?).  M-process-"faithful I"-process-M.

> [Alexander] In an empty
> state
> it seizes somehow to be, and you become unconscious. So this "self"
> corresponds to any-thing which it perceives or to no-thing at all.
> 

[Tim]
There might be need for an I-as-idea too.

I have thought of this analogy, for what I am terming, at least for now,
the faithful I, the mental I, and the material I.  From the MoQ the
mental I and the material I are considered illusions... and the faithful
I is not to be explained, it is, maybe, the I which partakes in DQ. 
Anyway, the analogy: imagine getting ready for work every morning, or
similar.  Imagine that you cannot use a mirror (and that you are
terrible at it, haven't done it yourself much, it is a new thing).  The
I getting ready is teh faithful I.  But it has no awareness of itself. 
It merely is.  It can track no changes.  Etc. and Etc

Now, imagine that you can photograph
yourself after you have gotten ready, but you cant use the photo until
the next morning.  The second day, you still have no mirror, so you
don't know what happens now, but you can look at the pic from the day
before.  For the analogy, I call the you in teh pic the material I, and
it is teh you thinking what you did to that material I that is the
mental I.  Over many days, perhaps you can 'tune' the mental and
material to produce (a highly adequate version of) the goal of the
'faithful I'.

It seems that reality might be very similar, except rather than waiting
a day, you have only to wait a fraction of a fraction of  a fraction ...
of a second - for the first parts of the image to arrive back (I am
thinking more generally now; for the case of the getting ready in the
mirror you get almost all the picture you care about at once, but the
fall-out of most decisions comes back distributed over time).  DQ is not
directly accessible because access implies process, and process implies
... (what happens if we follow our noses?)



> 
> 
>
> 
> **Alexander**
> 
> Heat engines, yes. But the concept of statistical mechanics was developed
> quite soon afterwards. It's called dynamics because it concerns functions
> of
> time.

[Tim]
that was my point.  Search all of thermodynamics and you wont find time!


> **Alexander**
> 
> A society is a social system with a certain kind of concrete
> organization,
> or social institutions if you like. 

[Tim]
I guess I just really struggle with the idea of 'society'.  I understand
the idea of another person, and I'm very much in favor of it, just to be
sure.  Everything after this seems dangerous and harmful.  Well, maybe
'everything' is too strong.  If I think of an I, and I, let me take you,
I can connect you with every other I, and I don't see how I can justify
leaving anyone out.  I understand that if you could quantitatively
correlate these connections, some would be very close and some would be
quite distant.  I understand that this correlation might show features
which might suggest 'level', but I don't see a discontinuity which would
permit me to say this is my society, and this is not.  The closest I
come is some sociopathic murderer, or the like, who must be locked up;
but still, that doesn't destroy the societal bond.
-- 
  
  rapsncows at fastmail.fm

-- 
http://www.fastmail.fm - Faster than the air-speed velocity of an
                          unladen european swallow