Dear Ian
> A combination of running a bronchitis fever, and the brandy I
> am taking to treat it, has made me come over all
> existentialist. And since everyone is on holiday...
Clearly the brandy has made your thinking extremelly lucid!
Now to see whether I can respond to some of your points in a
similarly logical manner.
> 1. Is it the 'I' that is cold, or is cold an external quality
> with which 'I' interact?
In order for the 'I' to acknowledge that there IS an 'external
reality' the 'I' must first be aware of its own 'Internal
Reality' as being distinct to that which impinges upon it. Thus
for the 'I' to ask whether it is cold or whether it is 'I' means
that 'I' is aware that its interaction with the 'external' is a
subjective experience. Therefore the question becomes
meaningless as both elements are contained within each other.
> If there is an 'I' and an external reality, then what does the
> interacting?
As 'I' and 'external reality' are contained within each other
they all interact with each other; that is, 'I' interacts with
'I' AND 'external reality', and 'external reality' interacts
with 'external reality' AND 'I'.
> Since the interface can only be 'I' or 'Not-I' what exists
> which participates in both realms?
Sorry you have forgotten about boolean algebra here. There can
also be a state of 'not-not-I', which is different to 'I':
'I' is 'I', 'Not-I' is something other than 'I', 'Not-Not-I is
something other than 'I' AND 'Not-I'. It is possible that it is
this state that can interact between the other two states -- you
have, I assume, wisely decided to neglect the 'intra-actions'
between these states?
> 2. Can there be two many 'I's in 'Ian'? If there was more
> than one 'I', would I be suffering from Multiple Personality
Disorder?
While 'Ian' might not be 'suffering' from MPD, 'I' certainly
might as 'I' would have difficulty in being aware as to which
'I' was authentic and which was inauthentic. Depending upon who
these I's were, Ian might even enjoy it rather than find it
'suffering'.
> However, if there were no 'I's, I would simply be an 'an': a
> mere object.
Can something that is not aware of 'I' be aware? This is the
tenet of reductionsit psychology isn't it? That 'lower order of
species' are not aware of an 'I'; therefore: are they 'aware'?
> Of course if all of this is merely a solipsistic experience
> and there is no external reality (and I think this is the un-
> admitted belief behind the Louise L. Hay approach) then
> whatever happens here is all part of my fever dream.
In which case, this answer is probably also a part of your
fevered 'I' and doesn't actually exist.
>
> I think we need to know! I demand a government enquiry!
Now you REALLY are imagining things!
> Yours in silly season, holiday madness.
Hope your fever soon abates.
=====
Best wishes
Paul
____________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.co.uk address at http://mail.yahoo.co.uk
or your free @yahoo.ie address at http://mail.yahoo.ie
|