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

Back to nothing

Expand Messages
  • Mary
    Doctorow s character Andrew one day lectures his elementary Brain Science class . . . ...consciousness, the field of all meaning, the necessary and sufficient
    Message 1 of 28 , May 9, 2014
    • 0 Attachment
      Doctorow's character Andrew one day lectures his elementary Brain Science class . . .

      "...consciousness, the field of all meaning, the necessary and sufficient condition of language, the beginning of all good mornings. Consciousness...is left when you erase all presumptions, forgo your affections, white out the family school, church, and nation in which you have couched your being...cast off the techno clutter of civilization, cut the wires of all circuits, including connections to your internal mechanisms, your bowel conditions, your hungers, what itches, what bleeds or produces tears, or the cracklings in the joints when you rise from sitting...and float free and unconnected in your own virtual black and starless space. And thus you have nothing to fix on, nothing for your thought to adhere to, no image, no sound, no smell, no physical sensation of any kind. Your are not in place, you are the place. You are not here, you are everywhere. You are not in relation to anything else. There is no anything else. There is nothing you can think
      of except of yourself thinking. You are in the depthless dingledom of your own soul." 

      But this isn't how we are situated in the world, is it? Consciousness is not a separate entity. Why does consciousness in order to be defined, need first to be emptied?

      In the following lecture to his class, Andrew continues . . .

      "So life is taxonomically without limit but with one intention common to its endless varieties—one intention to define it in all its minded or mindless manifestations—its pathetic intention to survive. Because of course it never does, for if life is one definable thing of infinite form then we have to say it feeds on itself. It is self-consuming. And that is not very reassuring if you mean to depend on the world for your consciousness. Is it? If consciousness exists without the world, it is nothing, and if it needs the world to exist, it is still nothing." 

      If consciousness is dependent on the world, why is it nothing?

      Mary
    • poseidon715
      Because consciousness is no thing , it cannot be observed in a mirror, or defined in a text. It is pure subjectivity, the I of existence.
      Message 2 of 28 , Sep 29, 2014
      • 0 Attachment
        Because consciousness is "no thing", it cannot be observed in a mirror, or defined in a text. It is pure subjectivity, the "I" of existence.
      • wsindarius
        Thus spake a text. Wil ... From: poseidon715@yahoo.com [existlist] To: existlist Sent: Mon, Sep 29,
        Message 3 of 28 , Sep 29, 2014
        • 0 Attachment
          Thus spake a text.

          Wil



          -----Original Message-----
          From: poseidon715@... [existlist] <existlist@yahoogroups.com>
          To: existlist <existlist@yahoogroups.com>
          Sent: Mon, Sep 29, 2014 4:32 pm
          Subject: [existlist] Re: Back to nothing

           
          Because consciousness is "no thing", it cannot be observed in a mirror, or defined in a text. It is pure subjectivity, the "I" of existence.
        • Peter ciccariello
          Because consciousness is no thing , it cannot be observed in a mirror, or defined in a text. It is pure subjectivity, the I of existence. O how I love to
          Message 4 of 28 , Sep 29, 2014
          • 0 Attachment
            'Because consciousness is "no thing", it cannot be observed in a mirror, or defined in a text. It is pure subjectivity, the "I" of existence.'

            O how I love to hear words like this....


            On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 6:13 PM, eupraxis@... [existlist] <existlist@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
             

            Thus spake a text.

            Wil




            -----Original Message-----
            From: poseidon715@... [existlist] <existlist@yahoogroups.com>
            To: existlist <existlist@yahoogroups.com>
            Sent: Mon, Sep 29, 2014 4:32 pm
            Subject: [existlist] Re: Back to nothing

             
            Because consciousness is "no thing", it cannot be observed in a mirror, or defined in a text. It is pure subjectivity, the "I" of existence.




            --
          • Mary
            Yet when you gaze in the mirror or engage in a text, you are making your observation an object. You are viewing your observation in the mirror or observing
            Message 5 of 28 , Sep 29, 2014
            • 0 Attachment
              Yet when you gaze in the mirror or engage in a text, you are making your observation an object. You are viewing your observation in the mirror or observing your own thoughts as you read. The only way consciousness is pure subjectivity is through being objective to itself. 

              Mary


              On Monday, September 29, 2014 4:32 PM, "poseidon715@... [existlist]" <existlist@yahoogroups.com> wrote:


               
              Because consciousness is "no thing", it cannot be observed in a mirror, or defined in a text. It is pure subjectivity, the "I" of existence.


            • christopher arthur
              My being that which I am is clear to me, despite the others lacking insight into my nature. Have I deceived myself?
              Message 6 of 28 , Sep 29, 2014
              • 0 Attachment
                My being that which I am is clear to me, despite the others lacking insight into my nature.  Have I deceived myself?

                On 9/29/2014 8:06 PM, Mary josephson45r@... [existlist] wrote:
                 
                Yet when you gaze in the mirror or engage in a text, you are making your observation an object. You are viewing your observation in the mirror or observing your own thoughts as you read. The only way consciousness is pure subjectivity is through being objective to itself. 

                Mary


                On Monday, September 29, 2014 4:32 PM, "poseidon715@... [existlist]" <existlist@yahoogroups.com> wrote:


                 
                Because consciousness is "no thing", it cannot be observed in a mirror, or defined in a text. It is pure subjectivity, the "I" of existence.



              • poseidon715
                I may have to disagree with that. Pure subjectivity only exists in the Now of existence - through action. Once you begin the reflecting upon your past deeds
                Message 7 of 28 , Sep 29, 2014
                • 0 Attachment
                  I may have to disagree with that. Pure subjectivity only exists in the Now of existence - through action. Once you begin the reflecting upon your past deeds (ie what you just did a second ago), you have entered the realm of the object and, thus, also interpretation. The Subjective self is now acting on an objective piece of history and applying its various interpretations to it. In this way, we can observe the Subjective Self only as a shadow of something walking before us (that is, our reason). We can catch its wake, but never look at it directly.
                • Mary
                  I m not following. How does subjectivity relate to deception here? On Monday, September 29, 2014 8:33 PM, christopher arthur chris.arthur1@gmail.com
                  Message 8 of 28 , Sep 29, 2014
                  • 0 Attachment
                    I'm not following. How does subjectivity relate to deception here?


                    On Monday, September 29, 2014 8:33 PM, "christopher arthur chris.arthur1@... [existlist]" <existlist@yahoogroups.com> wrote:


                     
                    My being that which I am is clear to me, despite the others lacking insight into my nature.  Have I deceived myself?

                    On 9/29/2014 8:06 PM, Mary josephson45r@... [existlist] wrote:
                     
                    Yet when you gaze in the mirror or engage in a text, you are making your observation an object. You are viewing your observation in the mirror or observing your own thoughts as you read. The only way consciousness is pure subjectivity is through being objective to itself. 

                    Mary


                    On Monday, September 29, 2014 4:32 PM, "poseidon715@... [existlist]" <existlist@yahoogroups.com> wrote:


                     
                    Because consciousness is "no thing", it cannot be observed in a mirror, or defined in a text. It is pure subjectivity, the "I" of existence.





                  • josephson45r
                    Could you relate your comments to Kierkegaard s Present Age? Or at least to reflection, without which our actions are random. ... I may have to disagree with
                    Message 9 of 28 , Sep 30, 2014
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Could you relate your comments to Kierkegaard's Present Age? Or at least to reflection, without which our actions are random.


                      ---In existlist@yahoogroups.com, <poseidon715@...> wrote :

                      I may have to disagree with that. Pure subjectivity only exists in the Now of existence - through action. Once you begin the reflecting upon your past deeds (ie what you just did a second ago), you have entered the realm of the object and, thus, also interpretation. The Subjective self is now acting on an objective piece of history and applying its various interpretations to it. In this way, we can observe the Subjective Self only as a shadow of something walking before us (that is, our reason). We can catch its wake, but never look at it directly.
                    • christopher arthur
                      I may have been trying to acknowledge how no one else can tell you whether you have the right thinking about yourself, since how is anyone else supposed to
                      Message 10 of 28 , Sep 30, 2014
                      • 0 Attachment
                        I may have been trying to acknowledge how no one else can tell you whether you have the right thinking about yourself, since how is anyone else supposed to know you (in the way you know yourself)?  I know that sometimes I misread a text when I first "engage" in it.  If that happens, don't I fail to observe my own thoughts?

                        On 9/29/2014 11:11 PM, Mary josephson45r@... [existlist] wrote:
                         
                        I'm not following. How does subjectivity relate to deception here?


                        On Monday, September 29, 2014 8:33 PM, "christopher arthur chris.arthur1@... [existlist]" <existlist@yahoogroups.com> wrote:


                         
                        My being that which I am is clear to me, despite the others lacking insight into my nature.  Have I deceived myself?

                        On 9/29/2014 8:06 PM, Mary josephson45r@... [existlist] wrote:
                         
                        Yet when you gaze in the mirror or engage in a text, you are making your observation an object. You are viewing your observation in the mirror or observing your own thoughts as you read. The only way consciousness is pure subjectivity is through being objective to itself. 

                        Mary


                        On Monday, September 29, 2014 4:32 PM, "poseidon715@...[existlist]" <existlist@yahoogroups.com> wrote:


                         
                        Becauseconsciousness is "no thing", it cannot be observed in a mirror, or defined in a text. It is pure subjectivity, the "I" of existence.






                      • josephson45r
                        Okay then. Your question is about objective truth, whether there is such a thing, and mine is about whether consciousness is strictly a subjective
                        Message 11 of 28 , Sep 30, 2014
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Okay then. Your question is about objective truth, whether there is such a thing, and mine is about whether consciousness is strictly a subjective entity/activity.  
                          __________

                          I don't think you fail to observe your own thoughts if you "misread" a text. You merely reflect on it, and due to a number of considerations—your own and that of others—you change your thoughts, which are an object for you. 
                          __________

                          Subjectivity requires objects, whether thoughts or things. Whether our subjective idea about them is true or not rests on other assumptions, such as a moral authority, etc.
                          __________
                        • poseidon715
                          Kierkegaard s concept of Reflection is that of an analytical process by which we remove ourselves from pure action (acting in the moment, acting by instinct or
                          Message 12 of 28 , Sep 30, 2014
                          • 0 Attachment

                            Kierkegaard's concept of Reflection is that of an analytical process by which we remove ourselves from pure action (acting in the moment, acting by instinct or gut feel, flow, etc) and shaping our actions based on social norms and expectations.  For instance, we stop acting according to our own individuality, and begin forming our actions based on questions like "how should someone in my position act?", "I am a waiter - how do waiter's carry their trays?".  We begin a process of abstraction that is based on social norms (the Public) and expectations.  Sartre's theory of Bad Faith and his famous example of the waiter is heavily influenced by Kierkegaard's concept of Reflection.

                             

                            Consciousness, then, for Kierkegaard is experienced through action and "Inwardness" (more specifically, in his religious language he called it "The Inwardness of Religion").  Inwardness is a state of understanding one's own consciousness completely separate from all Reflection on the objective world.  It’s like a state of being, in a sense - it just is.  It acts upon the world of objects, but it itself is not an object, and should not be understood as an object without corrupting it, thus becoming the "dual-minded man", someone who no longer acts with pure intentions but whose actions are corrupted by the (objective) world.

                             

                            This is all very mystical, and Mary, I appreciate your point that in order for a Subjective to exist (or at least be meaningful) at all, it is in relation to the Objective world.  Sartre has a similar criticism.  For as mystical as the Subjective Self may be, it is only meaningful in relation to the objective world upon which it is acting, which means that its definition is necessarily tied up in the Objective world.  Am I interpreting you right here?

                          • josephson45r
                            Yes, you have my meaning. My preliminary investigation of Kierkegaard suggests that this Reflective attitude of the abstract Public is necessary and drives one
                            Message 13 of 28 , Sep 30, 2014
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Yes, you have my meaning. My preliminary investigation of Kierkegaard suggests that this Reflective attitude of the abstract Public is necessary and drives one Inward and thus able to develop concrete individuality.
                            • poseidon715
                              Would that imply that one only knows oneself as a negation of the public sphere - the Self is whatever is not public; it is what remains when the world is
                              Message 14 of 28 , Oct 1, 2014
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Would that imply that one only knows oneself as a negation of the public sphere - the Self is whatever is not public; it is what remains when the world is stripped away...

                                I think Kierkegaard would take issue with this Cartesian approach. If one starts with the Public or external world, one would find oneself faced with a chasm which would need to be "leaped" across in order to escape a seemingly inescapable world of meaningless cause and effect. The Self cannot live in that deterministic world, only endless machinations.
                                To Kierkegaard where we start (with consciousness or inwardness) makes all the difference in regards to where we end in our understanding of human nature.
                              • josephson45r
                                I haven t encountered anything yet to indicate where the Self ought to begin, whether inwardness is innate or develops in distinction from the Public.
                                Message 15 of 28 , Oct 1, 2014
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  I haven't encountered anything yet to indicate where the Self ought to begin, whether inwardness is innate or develops in distinction from the Public. Professor Sadler commented in his video on The Present Age that Kierkegaard said the Public is necessary for, perhaps even drives, the development of inwardness, hence my comment. This would however fit with Kierkegaard's faith that adversity helps create our self. With so little background, of course, I could easily be mistaken.

                                  Mary


                                  ---In existlist@yahoogroups.com, <poseidon715@...> wrote :

                                  Would that imply that one only knows oneself as a negation of the public sphere - the Self is whatever is not public; it is what remains when the world is stripped away...

                                  I think Kierkegaard would take issue with this Cartesian approach. If one starts with the Public or external world, one would find oneself faced with a chasm which would need to be "leaped" across in order to escape a seemingly inescapable world of meaningless cause and effect. The Self cannot live in that deterministic world, only endless machinations.
                                  To Kierkegaard where we start (with consciousness or inwardness) makes all the difference in regards to where we end in our understanding of human nature.
                                • poseidon715
                                  I watched Sadler s lecture about six months ago and I started listening to it again today on my commute home. I heard the statement you made reference to,
                                  Message 16 of 28 , Oct 1, 2014
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    I watched Sadler's lecture about six months ago and I started listening to it again today on my commute home. I heard the statement you made reference to, concerning reflection driving us toward inwardness, but I did not get to the end of the lecture today, so I don't remember what he has to say about it.  I did start reading Present Age again last night, and I have yet to come across any statements to back up this position, but I will post any quotes i find concerning this, either for or against this position.  

                                    My own understanding of Reflection as described in Present Age is purely a product and function of social reality, and does not positively contribute growth of the self.  
                                  • Mary
                                    Thank you! I ll read the text; it seems so very relevant today. Mary On Wednesday, October 1, 2014 6:57 PM, poseidon715@yahoo.com [existlist]
                                    Message 17 of 28 , Oct 1, 2014
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      Thank you! I'll read the text; it seems so very relevant today.

                                      Mary


                                      On Wednesday, October 1, 2014 6:57 PM, "poseidon715@... [existlist]" <existlist@yahoogroups.com> wrote:


                                       
                                      I watched Sadler's lecture about six months ago and I started listening to it again today on my commute home. I heard the statement you made reference to, concerning reflection driving us toward inwardness, but I did not get to the end of the lecture today, so I don't remember what he has to say about it.  I did start reading Present Age again last night, and I have yet to come across any statements to back up this position, but I will post any quotes i find concerning this, either for or against this position.  

                                      My own understanding of Reflection as described in Present Age is purely a product and function of social reality, and does not positively contribute growth of the self.  


                                    • poseidon715
                                      Morality is character, character is that which is engraved… but the sand and the sea have no character and neither has abstract intelligence [he has been
                                      Message 18 of 28 , Oct 1, 2014
                                      • 0 Attachment

                                        "Morality is character, character is that which is engraved… but the sand and the sea have no character and neither has abstract intelligence [he has been speaking of the Public], for character is really inwardness.  Immorality, as energy, is also character; but to be neither moral nor immoral is merely ambiguous, and ambiguity enters into life when the qualitative distinctions are weakened by a gnawing reflection."

                                        Present Age, pg. 14, Harper Perennial Modern Thought, 2010.

                                         

                                        Here, passionless abstraction through the process of Reflection has been his primary critique of the present age.  All morality, character, and one could continue on to individuality, are defined through inwardness, completely outside of the influence of the World through the process of reflection.


                                        Kierkegaard' s mysticism fascinate me, but also disturbs me a bit in the same way that I think it fascinated and disturbed Sartre - the primacy of action itself defines the individual as something wholly other from the Objective world, and yet we are still unequivocally tied to it.  In one of his many paradoxical views, I think Kierkegaard himself would even agree with this sentiment.

                                      • Mary
                                        Here is the passage Sadler quotes indicating the Public has usefulness. My source is the on-line version of The Present Age and Of The Difference Between A
                                        Message 19 of 28 , Oct 2, 2014
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          Here is the passage Sadler quotes indicating the Public has usefulness. My source is the on-line version of The Present Age and Of The Difference Between A Genius And An Apostle and can be found through this link, and it occurs at approximately the 47:30 minute:second mark in the video.


                                          "The abstract levelling process, that self-combustion of the human race, produced by the friction which arises when the individual ceases to exist as singled out by religion, is bound to continue, like a trade wind, and consume everything. But through it each individual for himself may receive once more a religious education, and in the highest sense, will be helped by the examen rigorosem of the levelling process to an essentially religious attitude. For the younger men who, however strongly they may personally cling to what they admire as eminent, realize from the beginning that the levelling process is evil in both the selfish individual and in the selfish generation, but that it can also, if they desire it honestly and before God, become the starting point for the highest lifefor them it will indeed be an education to live in the age of levelling...And it will add fuel to their enthusiasm to understand that it is in fact through error that the individual is given access to the highest, if he courageously desires it. But the levelling process will have to continue, and must be completed, just as the scandal had to come into the world, though woe to them by whom it comes." (Kierkegaard, p. 55-56)

                                          Since it seems impossible to escape being born into it, it's only through passionate reaction to the Public that the individual begins. And I think what Kierkegaard also is saying is only through fidelity to something higher than ourselves can we make the leap back to ourselves.

                                          Mary




                                          On Wednesday, October 1, 2014 6:57 PM, "poseidon715@... [existlist]" <existlist@yahoogroups.com> wrote:


                                           
                                          I watched Sadler's lecture about six months ago and I started listening to it again today on my commute home. I heard the statement you made reference to, concerning reflection driving us toward inwardness, but I did not get to the end of the lecture today, so I don't remember what he has to say about it.  I did start reading Present Age again last night, and I have yet to come across any statements to back up this position, but I will post any quotes i find concerning this, either for or against this position.  

                                          My own understanding of Reflection as described in Present Age is purely a product and function of social reality, and does not positively contribute growth of the self.  


                                        • christopher arthur
                                          Am I far off the mark in saying that you want to speak in general about qualities of human individuality itself, specifically with respect to sentience? ... Am
                                          Message 20 of 28 , Oct 5, 2014
                                          • 0 Attachment
                                            Am I far off the mark in saying that you want to speak in general about qualities of human individuality itself, specifically with respect to sentience?

                                            On 9/30/2014 12:11 PM, josephson45r@... [existlist] wrote:
                                             
                                            Okay then. Your question is about objective truth, whether there is such a thing, and mine is about whether consciousness is strictly a subjective entity/activity.  
                                            __________

                                            I don't think you fail to observe your own thoughts if you "misread" a text. You merely reflect on it, and due to a number of considerations—your own and that of others—you change your thoughts, which are an object for you. 
                                            __________

                                            Subjectivity requires objects, whether thoughts or things. Whether our subjective idea about them is true or not rests on other assumptions, such as a moral authority, etc.
                                            __________

                                          • Anton Cagle
                                            Sounds right... What were your thoughts on the qualities of human sentience? If you would like to talk about the qualities of truth and epistemology, I am
                                            Message 21 of 28 , Oct 5, 2014
                                            • 0 Attachment
                                              Sounds right...  What were your thoughts on the qualities of human sentience?

                                              If you would like to talk about the qualities of truth and epistemology, I am happy to go down that path.  I am particularly fond of the phrase "epistemelogical skepticism" when it comes to claims of objective Truth.


                                              From: "christopher arthur chris.arthur1@... [existlist]" <existlist@yahoogroups.com>
                                              To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
                                              Sent: Sunday, October 5, 2014 10:17 AM
                                              Subject: Re: [existlist] Re: Back to nothing

                                               
                                              Am I far off the mark in saying that you want to speak in general about qualities of human individuality itself, specifically with respect to sentience?

                                              On 9/30/2014 12:11 PM, josephson45r@... [existlist] wrote:


                                               
                                              Okay then. Your question is about objective truth, whether there is such a thing, and mine is about whether consciousness is strictly a subjective entity/activity.  
                                              __________

                                              I don't think you fail to observe your own thoughts if you "misread" a text. You merely reflect on it, and due to a number of considerations—your own and that of others—you change your thoughts, which are an object for you. 
                                              __________

                                              Subjectivity requires objects, whether thoughts or things. Whether our subjective idea about them is true or not rests on other assumptions, such as a moral authority, etc.
                                              __________



                                            • Mary
                                              Yes, but with respect to sensibilities not sentience. One s concrete experiences, rather than abstract concepts, frame our individuality. Much like the
                                              Message 22 of 28 , Oct 5, 2014
                                              • 0 Attachment
                                                Yes, but with respect to sensibilities not sentience. One's concrete experiences, rather than abstract concepts, frame our individuality. Much like the objective, sentience is necessary but can't determine our individual sensibilities which operate more in the realm of mystery than objectivity. 

                                                Mary


                                                On Sunday, October 5, 2014 10:17 AM, "christopher arthur chris.arthur1@... [existlist]" <existlist@yahoogroups.com> wrote:


                                                 
                                                Am I far off the mark in saying that you want to speak in general about qualities of human individuality itself, specifically with respect to sentience?

                                                On 9/30/2014 12:11 PM, josephson45r@... [existlist] wrote:
                                                 
                                                Okay then. Your question is about objective truth, whether there is such a thing, and mine is about whether consciousness is strictly a subjective entity/activity.  
                                                __________

                                                I don't think you fail to observe your own thoughts if you "misread" a text. You merely reflect on it, and due to a number of considerations—your own and that of others—you change your thoughts, which are an object for you. 
                                                __________

                                                Subjectivity requires objects, whether thoughts or things. Whether our subjective idea about them is true or not rests on other assumptions, such as a moral authority, etc.
                                                __________



                                              • josephson45r
                                                An existentialist is the sort of person who chooses based on truth and certainty or lack thereof. It s how one feels, skeptical or certain, about truth which
                                                Message 23 of 28 , Oct 8, 2014
                                                • 0 Attachment
                                                  An existentialist is the sort of person who chooses based on truth and certainty or lack thereof. It's how one feels, skeptical or certain, about truth which guides our choices. We'd like to place our trust in truth, but ultimately we believe in the truth we choose Even at the point of asserting there is no truth or certainty or choice, we nevertheless believe that.

                                                  Mary


                                                  ---In existlist@yahoogroups.com, <poseidon715@...> wrote :

                                                  Sounds right...  What were your thoughts on the qualities of human sentience?

                                                  If you would like to talk about the qualities of truth and epistemology, I am happy to go down that path.  I am particularly fond of the phrase "epistemelogical skepticism" when it comes to claims of objective Truth.


                                                  From: "christopher arthur chris.arthur1@... [existlist]" <existlist@yahoogroups.com>
                                                  To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
                                                  Sent: Sunday, October 5, 2014 10:17 AM
                                                  Subject: Re: [existlist] Re: Back to nothing

                                                   
                                                  Am I far off the mark in saying that you want to speak in general about qualities of human individuality itself, specifically with respect to sentience?

                                                  On 9/30/2014 12:11 PM, josephson45r@... [existlist] wrote:


                                                   
                                                  Okay then. Your question is about objective truth, whether there is such a thing, and mine is about whether consciousness is strictly a subjective entity/activity.  
                                                  __________

                                                  I don't think you fail to observe your own thoughts if you "misread" a text. You merely reflect on it, and due to a number of considerations—your own and that of others—you change your thoughts, which are an object for you. 
                                                  __________

                                                  Subjectivity requires objects, whether thoughts or things. Whether our subjective idea about them is true or not rests on other assumptions, such as a moral authority, etc.
                                                  __________



                                                • christopher arthur
                                                  I wonder if such an inquiry would reap the benefit of cultivating empathy. ... I wonder if such an inquiry would reap the benefit of cultivating empathy. On
                                                  Message 24 of 28 , Oct 10, 2014
                                                  • 0 Attachment
                                                    I wonder if such an inquiry would reap the benefit of cultivating empathy.


                                                    On 10/5/2014 11:50 AM, Mary josephson45r@... [existlist] wrote:
                                                     
                                                    Yes, but with respect to sensibilities not sentience. One's concrete experiences, rather than abstract concepts, frame our individuality. Much like the objective, sentience is necessary but can't determine our individual sensibilities which operate more in the realm of mystery than objectivity. 

                                                    Mary


                                                    On Sunday, October 5, 2014 10:17 AM, "christopher arthur chris.arthur1@... [existlist]" <existlist@yahoogroups.com> wrote:


                                                     
                                                    Am I far off the mark in saying that you want to speak in general about qualities of human individuality itself, specifically with respect to sentience?

                                                    On 9/30/2014 12:11 PM, josephson45r@... [existlist] wrote:
                                                     
                                                    Okaythen. Your question is about objective truth, whether there is such a thing, and mine is about whether consciousness is strictly a subjective entity/activity.  
                                                    __________

                                                    I don't think you fail to observe your own thoughts if you "misread" a text. You merely reflect on it, and due to a number of considerations—your own and that of others—you change your thoughts, which are an object for you. 
                                                    __________

                                                    Subjectivityrequires objects, whether thoughts or things. Whether our subjective idea about them is true or not rests on other assumptions, such as a moral authority, etc.
                                                    __________




                                                  • Anton Cagle
                                                    I am a little unclear as to what inquiry you are referring, so I am not sure if I am on the same page, however, I will say that it is a general rule of
                                                    Message 25 of 28 , Oct 10, 2014
                                                    • 0 Attachment
                                                      I am a little unclear as to what "inquiry" you are referring, so I am not sure if I am on the same page, however, I will say that it is a general rule of creative writing that the more specific you can get regarding pulling inspiration from your own personal experiences, the more you will paradoxically create empathy and connection with the reader.

                                                      Not sure if this relates, but it seemed relevant...


                                                      From: "christopher arthur chris.arthur1@... [existlist]" <existlist@yahoogroups.com>
                                                      To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
                                                      Sent: Friday, October 10, 2014 9:33 AM
                                                      Subject: Re: [existlist] Re: Back to nothing

                                                       
                                                      I wonder if such an inquiry would reap the benefit of cultivating empathy.


                                                      On 10/5/2014 11:50 AM, Mary josephson45r@... [existlist] wrote:


                                                       
                                                      Yes, but with respect to sensibilities not sentience. One's concrete experiences, rather than abstract concepts, frame our individuality. Much like the objective, sentience is necessary but can't determine our individual sensibilities which operate more in the realm of mystery than objectivity. 

                                                      Mary


                                                      On Sunday, October 5, 2014 10:17 AM, "christopher arthur chris.arthur1@... [existlist]" <existlist@yahoogroups.com> wrote:


                                                       
                                                      Am I far off the mark in saying that you want to speak in general about qualities of human individuality itself, specifically with respect to sentience?

                                                      On 9/30/2014 12:11 PM, josephson45r@... [existlist] wrote:
                                                       
                                                      Okaythen. Your question is about objective truth, whether there is such a thing, and mine is about whether consciousness is strictly a subjective entity/activity.  
                                                      __________

                                                      I don't think you fail to observe your own thoughts if you "misread" a text. You merely reflect on it, and due to a number of considerations—your own and that of others—you change your thoughts, which are an object for you. 
                                                      __________

                                                      Subjectivityrequires objects, whether thoughts or things. Whether our subjective idea about them is true or not rests on other assumptions, such as a moral authority, etc.
                                                      __________






                                                    • Mary
                                                      I glean from this that you consider empathy a desirable quality, and you re wondering if an inquiry into the nature of individual sensibilities may develop it.
                                                      Message 26 of 28 , Oct 10, 2014
                                                      • 0 Attachment
                                                        I glean from this that you consider empathy a desirable quality, and you're wondering if an inquiry into the nature of individual sensibilities may develop it. It's always possible, but one can't expect this of everyone due to individual differences, right? Empathy is a bit mysterious. Is it natural, or can it be learned, or is it both? How it develops isn't exactly understood, yet it seems important for many of our relationships. Some sensibilities are sometimes revealed through empathetic experience but others are personal. Am I even close?

                                                        Mary




                                                        On Friday, October 10, 2014 9:33 AM, "christopher arthur chris.arthur1@... [existlist]" <existlist@yahoogroups.com> wrote:


                                                         
                                                        I wonder if such an inquiry would reap the benefit of cultivating empathy.


                                                        On 10/5/2014 11:50 AM, Mary josephson45r@... [existlist] wrote:
                                                         
                                                        Yes, but with respect to sensibilities not sentience. One's concrete experiences, rather than abstract concepts, frame our individuality. Much like the objective, sentience is necessary but can't determine our individual sensibilities which operate more in the realm of mystery than objectivity. 

                                                        Mary


                                                        On Sunday, October 5, 2014 10:17 AM, "christopher arthur chris.arthur1@... [existlist]" <existlist@yahoogroups.com> wrote:


                                                         
                                                        Am I far off the mark in saying that you want to speak in general about qualities of human individuality itself, specifically with respect to sentience?

                                                        On 9/30/2014 12:11 PM, josephson45r@... [existlist] wrote:
                                                         
                                                        Okaythen. Your question is about objective truth, whether there is such a thing, and mine is about whether consciousness is strictly a subjective entity/activity.  
                                                        __________

                                                        I don't think you fail to observe your own thoughts if you "misread" a text. You merely reflect on it, and due to a number of considerations—your own and that of others—you change your thoughts, which are an object for you. 
                                                        __________

                                                        Subjectivityrequires objects, whether thoughts or things. Whether our subjective idea about them is true or not rests on other assumptions, such as a moral authority, etc.
                                                        __________






                                                      • josephson45r
                                                        If not empathy, then at least solidarity in difference, a quality which can be cultivated. ... I glean from this that you consider empathy a desirable quality,
                                                        Message 27 of 28 , Oct 13, 2014
                                                        • 0 Attachment
                                                          If not empathy, then at least solidarity in difference, a quality which can be cultivated.

                                                          ---In existlist@yahoogroups.com, <josephson45r@...> wrote :

                                                          I glean from this that you consider empathy a desirable quality, and you're wondering if an inquiry into the nature of individual sensibilities may develop it. It's always possible, but one can't expect this of everyone due to individual differences, right? Empathy is a bit mysterious. Is it natural, or can it be learned, or is it both? How it develops isn't exactly understood, yet it seems important for many of our relationships. Some sensibilities are sometimes revealed through empathetic experience but others are personal. Am I even close?

                                                          Mary

                                                          On Friday, October 10, 2014 9:33 AM, "christopher arthur chris.arthur1@... [existlist]" <existlist@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

                                                          I wonder if such an inquiry would reap the benefit of cultivating empathy.

                                                          On 10/5/2014 11:50 AM, Mary josephson45r@... [existlist] wrote:
                                                           
                                                          Yes, but with respect to sensibilities not sentience. One's concrete experiences, rather than abstract concepts, frame our individuality. Much like the objective, sentience is necessary but can't determine our individual sensibilities which operate more in the realm of mystery than objectivity. 

                                                          Mary

                                                          On Sunday, October 5, 2014 10:17 AM, "christopher arthur chris.arthur1@... [existlist]" <existlist@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
                                                           
                                                          Am I far off the mark in saying that you want to speak in general about qualities of human individuality itself, specifically with respect to sentience?

                                                        • christopher arthur
                                                          Yes I suppose that it is in the neighborhood of heterogeneity.
                                                          Message 28 of 28 , Oct 13, 2014
                                                          • 0 Attachment
                                                            Yes I suppose that it is in the neighborhood of heterogeneity.

                                                            On 10/13/2014 9:14 AM, josephson45r@... [existlist] wrote:
                                                             

                                                            If not empathy, then at least solidarity in difference, a quality which can be cultivated.


                                                            ---In existlist@yahoogroups.com, <josephson45r@...> wrote :

                                                            I glean from this that you consider empathy a desirable quality, and you're wondering if an inquiry into the nature of individual sensibilities may develop it. It's always possible, but one can't expect this of everyone due to individual differences, right? Empathy is a bit mysterious. Is it natural, or can it be learned, or is it both? How it develops isn't exactly understood, yet it seems important for many of our relationships. Some sensibilities are sometimes revealed through empathetic experience but others are personal. Am I even close?

                                                            Mary

                                                            On Friday, October 10, 2014 9:33 AM, "christopher arthur chris.arthur1@... [existlist]" <existlist@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

                                                            I wonder if such an inquiry would reap the benefit of cultivating empathy.

                                                            On 10/5/2014 11:50 AM, Mary josephson45r@... [existlist] wrote:
                                                             
                                                            Yes, but with respect to sensibilities not sentience. One's concrete experiences, rather than abstract concepts, frame our individuality. Much like the objective, sentience is necessary but can't determine our individual sensibilities which operate more in the realm of mystery than objectivity. 

                                                            Mary

                                                            On Sunday, October 5, 2014 10:17 AM, "christopher arthur chris.arthur1@... [existlist]" <existlist@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
                                                             
                                                            Am I far off the mark in saying that you want to speak in general about qualities of human individuality itself, specifically with respect to sentience?


                                                          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.