32687Re: [dsg] VISIBLE OBJECT IS NOT A DOT OF LIGHT!!!
- May 2, 2004Hello Again Rob,
----- Original Message -----
From: "robmoult" <rob.moult@...>
Sent: Saturday, May 01, 2004 3:11 PM
Subject: Re: [dsg] VISIBLE OBJECT IS NOT A DOT OF LIGHT!!!
> So now the questions arises, "is the eye door the entire field of
> vision (frame model) or is the eye door a small fraction of the field
> of vision which is later assembled (by some other underlying process)
> into an entire field of vision (pixel model)"?
> My understanding of modern science is that there are distinct rods
> and cones in the retina, but brain recieves the signals from all
> these nerves together as a block (one frame, not a pixel). The
> analysis of the frame into portions comes later (a mental process).
> In the same vein, when we taste sweet and sour soup, the part of the
> tongue that "tastes" sweet is separate from the part of the tongue
> that tastes "sour", but the brain recieves the signals from these two
> parts of the tongue together. The analysis of the taste into sweet
> and sour comes later (a mental process).
> Similarly, the "heat sensing nerves" are distinct from the "cold
> sensing nerves" in the body, but the brain recieves the signals from
> both sets of nerves together.
I'll certainly defer to your superior knowledge of neurophysiology. I tend
to think of abhidhamma as being a sort of anatomy of a moment of experience,
which I take to be quite a different thing from neurophysiology, physics and
so on. I know some other contributors also think of modern science as being
somehow the same as abhidhamma, but I don't see it that way at all. To me,
trying to fit abhidhamma into modern science is a dead end--just my opinion,
of course--but I have no interest at all in trying to reconcile the two. If
I'm wrong, there may be great virtue in doing this, so best wishes for your
Nice chatting with you as always.
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>