[MD] Quality and the Higgs Field: An Analogy

[118]

Hi Ham,
I thought I would jump in on one paragraph of yours here you wrote in
reply to John.

On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 3:19 PM, Ham Priday <hampday1 at verizon.net> wrote:

> If subjective awareness to you is only a neurological process going on in
> your head, then you reject the core self or 'psyche' as the locus of
> awareness.  Then the thoughts and feelings you experience are not 'yours'
> but are somehow extracted from a "qualitative field" that exists in nature
> or the universe.  My epistemology is based on the belief that
> value-sensibility, and the experience we derive from it, are proprietary to
> the self.

[Mark]
This is an interesting subject.  First of all, the use of "only" is
not appropriate, since thoughts are pretty special.  I differentiate
between the thoughts going on in the head (which appears to be of
neurobiological origin), and that entity which is experiencing the
thoughts (your subjectively aware).  Similar thoughts can happen to
many people, so their is really no ownership of such.  The ownership
resides in the witness of those thoughts.  Now, I would say that this
is my body, so its thoughts are my property.  This would be similar to
owning a house, and considering everything in it to be mine.  It does
not mean that the house and myself are the same thing.  Thoughts are a
result of interaction in the brain with that outside.  It requires
both to have thoughts since we have to think about something.

The question is, how much control do we have over those thoughts.  Can
we say "I am going to think about something?"  Well, it is true that I
can say that I am going to think about MoQ, and begin reading posts,
but am I in control of each specific thought that results?  Where does
the decision to think about MoQ come from?  Is there a part of the
mind that decides what I is going to think about?  If so, what is
controlling that part?  Where does the control lie within our
thinking?  At some point, there has to be a decision maker that is
deciding, but such a thing is hard to find, and even harder to pretend
we are in some kind of control of such a thing.

Personally, I let my mind go free, and see what it comes up with.  If
I try to forget something, I can't.  If I think I can control my
thoughts, then why do I think about things out of the blue?  A thought
arrises from somewhere deep within, I become conscious of it, and I
see where it takes me.  Now, this is not a sense of lack of control,
since I can choose to entertain it, or move on.  People who are
obsessive have a hard time with that.  Such directional control is
what I term attitude.  If I find the thought to be of high Quality, I
continue with it.  This is, of course, if I am paying attention.  Much
of the time, thoughts just go in and out, and I can't remember
specifically what I was thinking about 10 minutes ago, all I know is
that it lead me to what I am thinking about now.  Of, course if I am
following some kind of logical progression, I can trace that, but much
of my thought is random and in response to the environment.  If I want
to think differently, I go to a movie, read a book, listen to music,
or call somebody on the phone.

So while the question of ownership of our thoughts is not a problem to
me, the question of control is.  Let me say, however, that the notion
of responsibility is very different.  I am responsible for thoughts
that I have, whether I can control them or not.  I have never believed
in the insanity plea.  Anybody who murders someone is insane, since it
is not a normal thing to do.  So, yes he is insane, which is why he
should be punished.  (whole nuther subject of course).

Mark
>
> 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
>