--On Tuesday, April 03, 2001 9:39 PM -0500 3dwavedave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:rr
> All
>
> After your heated discussion about "Are atoms aware?" and even if this
> is only so to some miniscule, very limited degree, I think the more
> important question is:
>
> What practical difference(s),in terms of human experience, would it make
> if this theory were true?
>
> Or even if this was never somehow "proven" to be "true" to a majority of
> humans,
>
> Could it still be a "good" theory?
>
> 3WD
>
>
>Are you saying that the human "experience" is any different than the atom
"experience". Sure our concepts may give rise to atoms, but call it
whatever you want, humans are composed of elementary things that would
usually not be thought of to be aware. If we are aware(using whatever
difinition you assign to awareness, I subscribe to the commonsense
definition that we all know but sometimes choose to tear apart) how does
something unaware give rise to something which is. Either the elementary
component is as aware as we are, or there is something external at work,
magically endowinging the collection of unaware constituents with awareness.
But here's another musing, might not this all be solved by unifying all of
existence into one, which from my interpretation the MOQ does anyway( this
is why Pirsig substituted Quality into the Tao te Ching, to show that it
was that one ultimate, call it Tao, call it Buddha, call it Brahman). If
we do this, on the most basic level my awareness is your awareness, which
is in turn shared with everything else in existence(atoms included of
course).
Bring on the barrage,
-Seth
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
