"One can't be too humble"...Tom Stoppard, not Pynchon

[David Morris]

Different times call for different metaphors. Clocks were once magical,
designed and forged by an inlelligence.  Not ever was it a chance
occurance. So thus was that metaphor one of wonder when first coined (my
speculation, not research).

Then/now,

Machines supplanting (Vs) fetid womb, both objects provoking fear and
wonder, reminds me of V.  (Note: Womb isn't Spark, but both are about
natural life force.)

I think it is probably relavent that V.'s date of delivery coincided with
the advent of maximum saturation, back then, of the Beatles & Ram Das, TM,
and all manner of Gurus and Ashrams into the West.  The 50's needed an acid
trip, a major kickstart to the head of the West-Head, into ancient wisdom
of MUCH older cultures still living in India, Tibet, Vietannam, and
 elsewhere.  TRP allegedly did lotsa Mind Altering Drugs (MAD) while
writing GR. I suspect he'd "Experienced" said drug's before writing V.  He
was dealing with major existential  metaphors in a means deeper than
History, but including all forms of History's artful expressions.

David Morris

On Monday, June 1, 2015, Joseph Tracy <brook7 at sover.net> wrote:

>
> Beautifully said.  Philosophically i share the sense that this kind of
> poetic language- the dance of the not-two-  is the only way for words to
> get close to the nature of this mystery. Maybe it is so that these are the
> same conceptually but the word mechanical is or at leasts seems more
> precise in origin and meaning.
> I think that vitalism( I  prefer a more taoist approach to trying to
> describe or think about these topics)has the edge as a metaphor in that the
> creative force remains mysteriously unified with the manifestation.( In
> taoism the no-thng is the essence of the ten thousand things or at least
> the vitalizing space or potentiality of the many) Saying people as physical
> and mental beings are mechanistic but not created just makes the watchmaker
> blind. Did a blind god really make dragonflies and zebras?  Wilson leaves
> the creative impetus to rules/limits/physical laws, but there still seems
> even within current science serious debate as to how absolute the rules are
> or whether the known rules/laws ( another awkward metaphor) are absolute
> and fixed or have sufficient explanatory power to cover what  is known.
> Part of what Tom Stoppard seemed to want to retain is the mystery that
> still resides even among scientists in quantum physics or consciousness.
> In that I share his urgent resistance. But in the centrality and uniqueness
> of human altruism and family love I am less sure.
>   Anyway, I thought Wilson was handling the topic with very real humility
> and is so much more intellectually palatable than Dawkins and his crowd.
>
> > On Jun 1, 2015, at 11:53 AM, David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com
> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >
> > Mechanistic or intrinsic spark are just differently-termed metaphors for
> the same thing: the creator/creation dynamic.  That subject is inherently
> paradoxical, both/and.  The very nature of a creation is limited
> manifestation that is actually limitless.  A dance of the not-two.
> >
> > David Morris
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 10:38 AM, Keith Davis <kbob42 at gmail.com
> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> > That is a tricky topic. If you say that the intelligence includes all,
> as in non-duality, then any and all actions take place in that allness, and
> are defined by it or limited by it. But how can the limitless be limited?
> Is it the same old question of free will? It has been proven that cognition
> is a step behind actual "happenings". For there to be an original action,
> would there need to be first an original thought, and is that possible if
> cognition is slower than "now"?
> >
> > On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 8:24 PM, Joseph Tracy <brook7 at sover.net
> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> > Really interesting conversation. I felt Stoppard had a powerful
> underlying challenge but was rather gummed up in getting it across. I
> thought Wilson was very persuasive that altruism while admirable for
> traditional human value systems, may  also be coded into nature as a
> pragmatic mechanism enhancing evolutionary survival and diversity. The
> assertion of Wilson’s I am most uncomfortable with is of all human
> functionality, and essentially  of all physical functionality, being
> mechanistic.
> >  It is a very weird metaphor or analogy to be insistent about.  One c
>
> > ould easily argue that quantum reality is more analogous to the
> metaphors of  vitalism and intrinsic spark than to a machine which by
> definition is a created/designed tool for use by a shaping intelligence.
> >
> > > On May 29, 2015, at 8:06 AM, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com
> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> https://evolution-institute.org/article/the-playwright-and-the-scientist-a-conversation-between-tom-stoppard-and-david-sloan-wilson/?utm_content=buffer37894&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer
> > > -
> > > Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l
> >
> > -
> > Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?listpynchon-l
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > www.innergroovemusic.com
> >
> >
>
> -
> Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?listpynchon-l
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20150601/dd3eee74/attachment.html>