[time 548] Re: [time 547] metaphors and tacit notions

Stephen P. King (stephenk1@home.com)
Mon, 16 Aug 1999 11:13:18 -0400

Dear Hitoshi,

        Umm, I am concerned that an emotional conflict over semantics is
occurring. :-( In Matti's post, [time 537], he writes:

"And at the top there is entire Universe, God, who subjectively
everything about the infinitely many quantum jumps
already occurred and whose contents of consciousness is determined by
infinite series of abstractions provided by infinite number
of subselves providing symbolic representations for what is
there. Abstraction is wonderful thing: the sins of average
self are abstracted and averaged for so many times that God probably
cannot decide who did it. Selves at various levels can occasionally get
enlightened by entanglement, which perhaps makes possible communication
between various levels of the hierarchy."

        I have a problem with this as it tacitly implies that the Universe, the
Totality of Existence, has "a will of its own". As I understand "bound
states" within your theory, I do not see how Matti's idea can explicitly
be realized. But I do see that is a metaphor, and suggest that we
interpret it as such.
        We are at very early stages of understanding the subtleties of your
formal theory. I am sure that all of us, as interested in Truth, can put
aside our cultural assumptions and work together.

Hitoshi Kitada wrote:
> Dear Matti,
> > On Sat, 14 Aug 1999, Hitoshi Kitada wrote:
> >
> > > Dear Matti,
> > >
> > > Matti, do you understand Japanese or/and Asian mind?
> > Well, you could answer this question best!
> My question should not be treated lightly like this. It is related
> with the idea of my theory that you do not understand.

        We need to be patient and understand that each of us has a unique
perspective of the Universe and so has knowledge unavailable to any



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Sat Oct 16 1999 - 00:36:29 JST