Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id QAA15792 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Sat, 30 Sep 2000 16:25:58 +0100 Subject: Re: mysticism etc Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2000 11:22:50 -0400 x-sender: wsmith1@camail2.harvard.edu x-mailer: Claris Emailer 2.0v3, Claritas Est Veritas From: "Wade T.Smith" <wade_smith@harvard.edu> To: "Memetics Discussion List" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Message-ID: <20000930152246.AAA29837@camailp.harvard.edu@[204.96.32.186]> Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
Hi Robin Faichney --
>"You're part
>of the universe so the universe is conscious through you" seems very
>simple to me.
Simple it is.
A ton of simple.
In exactly the same way a mobius strip is simple. It shows us something
in a way that is not the thing itself. A mobius strip does not prove
itself to be in two dimensions, but the trick of two dimensions is
established.
You have supplied us with the trick of the consciousness of the universe
without establishing the consciousness itself.
And, I've asked you to prove this assertion, and you've waffled,
returning to the trick every time.
I've supplied the EEG of my consciousness, and your claim is that this
proves the consciousness of the universe.
I stay firm with the claim that a property of a part, while contained
within the whole, is not necessarily a property of the whole, in the same
way my tongue can taste food, but my feet cannot- in the same way I ride
my bicycle upon its rubber tires, and not upon its frame. And yet my body
is my body, and a bicycle is only a bicycle with all those parts. Life,
and the thing that makes us consider consciousness to be one of its
properties, is an emergence from the materials and energies of the
universe, not necessarily a property of all of the parts of the universe,
and yet, the universe is only the universe with all its parts.
It's a nice, cloyingly warm, 'mystical' awareness that supposes a
property such as consciousness to the universe, it gives us a place
there, within this vast and timeless span of motion we can really have no
contact with, that has spanned across time and space and that has
produced, in much the same way as any dynamic environment produces
change, the forms of life we are.
Mysticism provides a pre-scientific connection to these processes. But,
"...it is all over with priests and gods when man becomes scientific.
Moral: science is the forbidden as such -- it alone is forbidden. Science
is the first sin, seed of all sin, the original sin. This alone is
morality. 'Thou shalt not know' -- the rest follows." - Nietzsche,
"Antichrist". Science provides the real knowing, not the comforting
imagination of knowledge.
Science provides the map behind the senses, the explanations behind the
dragons there be there- the reasons why, not just the feelings of.
You have only provided the feelings of. Indeed, you've attempted to
validate these totally subjective feelings with no other evidence than
that the feelings are felt.
Tricks, I say, of the senses. I can only understand your claim as a
presentation of a trick, and while I like magic shows, every time I walk
outside the theatre, rabbits do not climb out of hats.
Show me the hat with the rabbit in it outside of the theatre.
- Wade
===============================================================
This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Sep 30 2000 - 16:27:31 BST