Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Either/ Or... and Absurdity

Expand Messages
  • Trinidad Cruz
    Well Mr. Science, you are beginning to give me substantial doubt concerning your arguments. I view your ideas falling within Hume s perceptions of causality.
    Message 1 of 36 , Jun 3 9:20 AM
      Well Mr. Science, you are beginning to give me substantial doubt
      concerning your arguments. I view your ideas falling within Hume's
      perceptions of causality. Perhaps you would like to defend or deny
      that. Perhaps I am confused, or drunk, or having an episode. To give
      you the benefit of the doubt which view do you argue: Cartwright's or
      Donaldson's? I don't think you know the difference, but then I'm not
      that smart, though Nancy Cartwright's "How The Laws Of Physics Lie
      1983" is one of the few books on my desk. If this is too much for you
      at least try to argue how an account of mental causality in
      physicalist terms is applicable to philosophy in any way except as a
      "scientific" proposition, and then at least attempt to defend it as
      actually scientific or drop it. You seem to be way out of your depth.
      Science fictionalists don't usually last long here. Ask Knott about
      clams, please. He can easily out-discourse you.


      --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Chris Lofting" <chrislofting@...>
      > > -----Original Message-----
      > > From: existlist@yahoogroups.com [mailto:existlist@yahoogroups.com] On
      > > Behalf Of Trinidad Cruz
      > > Sent: Saturday, 2 June 2007 11:40 PM
      > > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
      > > Subject: [existlist] Re: Either/ Or... and Absurdity
      > >
      > > Wil, how about steering this discussion into terms of mental
      > > causality. That would not be outside of Hegelian propositions, and for
      > > others in the group there is good reference available online from the
      > > kidddies at Stanford on Davidson whose position is very interesting
      > > and in this case clarifying.
      > >
      > > :http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/anomalous-monism/
      > >
      > There is nothing of value here - it is predictable and shows
      ignorance of
      > 'in here' dynamics and its processing of difference/sameness and how our
      > theories/ontologies will reflect symmetric perspectives trying to
      deal with
      > the asymmetric. As such it needs to 'move on'.
      > ALL of the properties/methods of modern physics reflect all that is
      > given the neurology; wave/particle duality etc etc etc are
      perspectives that
      > stem from the methodology used in experimental design etc etc etc.
      and THAT
      > comes out of a basic property of reality - the containment of noise will
      > elicit order through self-referencing - all scales.
      > Thus physics is metaphor but is iconic in form and so presents a
      'what you
      > see is what you get' - the figurative is taken literally - and then
      > into gaga-land perspectives since few take into consideration the
      method of
      > meaning derivation and its influence on experiment design etc.
      > The price paid for a serial focus on reality is that it is a
      > focus that is interpreted as if representing reality 'as is' when it
      is more
      > so reality 'as interpreted'.
      > A wonderful experience (or dark, depending on the emotion involved)
      is the
      > experiencing of parallel communication where the emotion is free of its
      > history. Without the history, the date/time stamp etc (which is
      processed by
      > a DIFFERENT part of our brains) the emotion becomes overwhelming
      since it
      > cannot be 'settled', it bounces around and can take one over as if
      > possessed.
      > In the past such an experience was given up to 'spirits' etc etc (or
      > infatuations etc) but with neurosciences we can map out what is
      going on -
      > the separation of history from experience, sequence from magnitude.
      > What this brings out is the use of emotion to communicate in parallel -
      > through resonance. This gets into mirror neurons as it does facial
      > expressions exposed over time to elicit some resonance of some form.
      > What this also brings out is non-verbal communications and the
      influence on
      > us unconsciously to start with and then the 'emergence' of the
      emotion if
      > not resolved.
      > Since our brains work off frequencies/wavelengths/amplitudes so anything
      > that resonates with such will elicit 'meaning' - and that in
      parallel. All
      > sensory harmonics elicit emotional resonance.
      > To see the structure of such meaning see such works as Cymatics where it
      > covers what happens when you spread sand on a vibrating surface -
      > form. Turn of the vibration (frequency) and the last pattern remains - a
      > form of memory.
      > Now make the vibrating surface a sphere (the brain) and the sand the
      > in that brain. What you get is meaning through emotional resonance
      and that
      > can be incapable of initially putting into words (and for some,
      never able
      > to complete any description due to the scope, the intensity, felt).
      > In the above link, and associated references, there appears to be no
      > consideration of emotion - even failure to recognise that the
      feelings of
      > 'truth' etc stem from our feelings associated with syntax where THAT
      > feeling, so essential to serial languages, is a property of hierarchic
      > development where all that matters, all that is meaningful, is the
      > in that hierarchy - be it a sentence structure or a corporate
      structure. As
      > such syntax is concentrated semantics. The feeling is linked to a more
      > generic form associated with territorial mapping and so links
      'truth' with a
      > sense of ownership.
      > By understanding the dynamics of emotion and neural activity we can
      map the
      > serial and the parallel in the derivation and communication of meaning.
      > Without such understanding all is 'wind' - and that includes "anomalous
      > monism"
      > Chris.
    • Exist List Moderator
      ... The Diamond Lake area is giving way to two expanded freeways. This is progress, of course. As with so many cities, Minneapolis once had more than 500 miles
      Message 36 of 36 , Jun 5 1:47 PM
        On Jun 05, 2007, at 8:57, Trinidad Cruz wrote:

        > I used to live in Minneapolis back in the 50's. I don't remember the
        > street but a couple of blocks from a little pond called Diamond Lake,
        > and a Nicolet Ave.

        The Diamond Lake area is giving way to two expanded freeways. This is
        progress, of course. As with so many cities, Minneapolis once had
        more than 500 miles of streetcar lines, all privately operated. The
        local government took over the lines -- and killed them in 1954 to
        replace the system with buses.

        I wish I could have seen the old system. I take the light rail, most
        of the 20 miles, from our apartment to the Metrodome on my way to
        campus. The new house will cut my time to campus in half or better.

        I'm not much for cities, anymore. I think cities are interesting when
        you are young and care for all the activity. Now, I just want to sit
        by the Mississippi or one of the lakes and relax. The nice thing
        about Minneapolis is that even with so many people, there are lots of
        little areas that seem like the country.

        - C. S. Wyatt
        I am what I am at this moment, not what I was and certainly not all
        that I shall be.
        http://www.tameri.com - Tameri Guide for Writers
        http://www.tameri.com/csw/exist - The Existential Primer
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.