[MD] perceptions

[MarshaV]

Hi Joe,


Yes, unknowable in the sense that there is a known and knower, so not "conceptually knowable." How about known through direct perception?  I have stated that DQ can be directly experienced and known like one knows the tea is hot when one is drinking it.  Can this be true?  Problem is that I can directly perceive, in such a manner, that there is a coiled snake ahead of me in the road, only to find out later that such certainty was unfounded and what I experienced was merely a coiled rope.  On discovering that what I was seeing was, indeed, a coiled rope, what I do know with certainty was that it was NOT a coiled snake.  This is why I accept the idea that the best way to discover Truth is by discovering what is false. 
 
But having written the above, I will leave the issue open for further investigation.  Perhaps Steve Hagen's book will offer some insight on the subject of perceptions.   
 
 
Marsha 
 





On Apr 3, 2013, at 2:09 PM, Joseph Maurer wrote:

> Hi MarshaV and All,
> 
> I have no sense of what you mean by "unknowable" DQ?  Unknowable is not the
> same as indefinable in DQ (indefinable) SQ (definable) metaphysics.
> "Unknowable" means a barrier to the contact of the faculty for knowledge.
> Indefinable accepts a direct contact in consciousness without language.
> "What was that?"  DQ!
> 
> Joe
> 
> 
> On 4/2/13 5:31 PM, "MarshaV" <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
> 
>> DQ is "indivisible, undefinable & unknowable"; the term 'indivisible' pointing
>> to monism, non-dualistic: indeterminate.  
> 


 
___