[MD] The Dynamics of Value

[Ham Priday]

On Oct. 29 at 2:01PM, Andre Broersen wrote:



> What you are saying here Ham are (literally) intellectual observations
> after the event.  I still tend to think that you want the positing of an
> independent observer, an independent object and the 'something' that
> 'happens' between the two without any 'primary' connection.

No, Andre, you read me incorrectly.  I assume that "the event" refers to 
experience.  If so, our cognizance of events (observation) represents our 
intellectual interpretation of experience.  (The time sequence is of no 
importance.)

The "independent observer" is crucial for the realization of value and its 
objectification of otherness (physical reality).  And value-sensibility 
holds these contingencies together as negated "essents".  But while Value is 
our "primary connection" to Essence, it is the negation of Essence that 
actualizes the differential nature of finitude.  Hence, negation is primary 
to difference (the Self/Other dichotomy), and individuated Sensibility is 
primary to the (space/time) appearance of finite existents.

Here's the bottom line: The ontology of Essentialism supports the theory 
that Absolute Essence is the "unmoved mover" which transcends the dynamics 
of negation.

I hope this clarifies your misconception.

Essentially speaking,
Ham