[MD] Quantum Enigma

[MarshaV]

Hi John,
 
I think W. James accepts the experience of intuition.  I cannot 
imagine a Radical Empiricist rejecting intuition.  I'm sure the 
Wiki info was pertaining to the scientific-SOM-variety of empiricist.  

Marsha 
 
 



On Oct 6, 2010, at 6:50 PM, John Carl wrote:

> made me look, Marsha. Even worse, made me wiki-look.
> ---On Rationalism vs. Empiricism
> The most prominent distinguishing characteristic between these two
> philosophies is that strict empiricists reject all *a priori* truths,
> decrying any belief in innate knowledge or intuition
> --------
> 
> So to an empiricist, "belief" is the problem.  Do they believe this
> strongly?  And from what "facts" is it derived?
> 
> Hmmm... indeed.  I'm with you on that one, Marsha.
> 
> John
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Sat, Oct 2, 2010 at 11:00 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Hello again,
>> 
>> Been thinking, normally dangerous, but with a fever doubly so.  -  I keep
>> thinking about you using the term "rational construct".  It seems to me
>> while your Philosophy of Essence and the Metaphysics of Quality are both
>> centered on Value their major difference is reason versus experience.  Yes?
>> Rationality versus Empiricism?   Do you agree?  And having done a search, I
>> see ti is a very old conflict, indeed.  Hmmm.
>> 
>> 
>> Marsha
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Oct 2, 2010, at 2:49 AM, MarshaV wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Greetings Ham,
>>> 
>>> On Oct 2, 2010, at 2:05 AM, Ham Priday wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Marsha:
>>>>> How I understand conscious awareness is as pure process,
>>>>> 100% immediate experience, and the moment one tries to
>>>>> analyze it, it is gone.  All other entities - I, knower, self,
>>>>> individual, me,  etc. -  are _conceptually constructed_ and
>>>>> have no independent existence.  They are a  conglomerate
>>>>> ever-changing, impermanent, interdependent, inorganic,
>>>>> biological, social and intellectual static patterns of value.
>>>> 
>>>> Ham:
>>>> Marsha, you are attempting to describe the subjective self as if it were
>> an objective entity, which of course is impossible.  Yes, "raw" experience
>> is "immediate", but it hardly represents 100% of conscious awareness.  There
>> is also the memory function which links self-awareness to the past and makes
>> experience a continuum; the emotive response which is the psycho-biological
>> reaction to what is experienced; and intellection which interprets the data
>> as a rational construct.  'I', 'Knower', 'Individual', and 'Me' are not
>> different entities but simply the labels we use to identify the Self.
>>>> 
>>>> That standard definition, which even you must be tired of by now, paints
>> a fuzzy picture of self-awareness as if to demean its credibility--which of
>> course is your intent.  I still feel this is somewhat disingenuous on your
>> part.  Certainly we cannot objectivize, quantify, measure, or localize
>> conscious awareness as we can, say, a rock or a tree.  Conversely, however,
>> what would the rock or tree be if there was no awareness of it?  As Pirsig
>> insisted, experience is primary; and since experience is known only to
>> awareness, all we really know about objective existence is that it is
>> patterned from sensible value.
>>> 
>>> Marsha:
>>> I am putting aside the experience of raw data (unpatterned experience)
>> and talking about conscious awareness as in mindfulness.  Mindfulness is a
>> technique easily learned and strengthened through practice.  It's the
>> experience of being here-now without constructing an associated past or
>> future.  In the mindfulness experience there is no building a subjective
>> self for it is all _process_, all immediate experience.  Pattern recognition
>> seems limited to the function of the sense organ.  It is _habit_ that
>> associates these immediate experiences with an individual, independent self,
>> or its various labels, rather than understanding that it is a flow of
>> experiences.  _Habit_ that when conscious awareness (mindfulness) stops then
>> the making of meaning begins (internal story-telling).  It is the conceptual
>> constructing, making of meaning, that creates the independent self.  It is
>> an after-experience add-on.  I am suggesting that in mindfulness it is
>> obvious that experiences comes fi
>> rst, and that associating now-experiences to a 'self' is a secondary
>> habit.   Experience is primary!  Self-building is secondary.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Thanks Ham,
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Marsha
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ___
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 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/md/archives.html
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> 
>> 
>> 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/md/archives.html
>> 
> 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/md/archives.html


 
___