Re: virus: If you're watchin' IT ya' ain't a part of IT (was: David's top 10 (here and now))

sodom (Sodom@ma.ultranet.com)
Thu, 08 Oct 1998 16:48:18 -0400


Yes, but we know how the eye works, and we know what cells are rtecptive to what colors. We can compare only through agreement
or disagreement of what we see. Regardless - we can be sure that if I paint a sign red, you will also see it that way because
the cells in your eyes will respond to certain frequencies in the same way mine will. Somewhere along the line, the data from
your eyes to your consciousness will get corrupted - but in most cases the corruption will fall into the "insignifigant"
catagory.

I do agree that absolute verification that we see the same thing is not possible with my current understanding.

Bill Roh

Joe E. Dees wrote:

> Date sent: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 09:20:48 -0400
> From: Bill Roh <sodom@ma.ultranet.com>
> To: virus@lucifer.com
> Subject: Re: virus: If you're watchin' IT ya' ain't a part of IT (was: David's top 10 (here and now))
> Send reply to: virus@lucifer.com
>
> >
> >
> > Joe E. Dees wrote: But Bill, our genetic makeup and environmental (developmental)
> >
> > > influences have caused us all to be wired, though similarly, not the
> > > same (Peter ain't Paul). The hardware and software are individual
> > > to each person, and possess individual differences. Furthermore,
> > > this structure is dynamic, not static, and changes throughout life,
> > > partially due to aging as that is genetically manifested, and partially
> > > due to the effects of each new experience upon the brain. The
> > > physical substrate of subjective experience is in each case unique
> > > to the individual and his/her existing situation; thus how can anyone
> > > maintain that the experiences themselves are not themselves equally
> > > unique?
> >
> >
> >
> > I am not suggesting that they are ot unique, I am suggesting that they are mush more alike than not alike. A good
> > example for me would be musical instruments. All acoustical instruments, no matter how well tuned or made, sound a
> > little different. No two Pianos sound the same, an upright and grand sound quite different from one another, but the
> > basics are still the same, and the sound is always identifiable. Even two coins minted together are not exactly alike.
> >
> > Humans are the same, my neurotransmitters work the same as yours, usually for similar reasons, I am build pretty close
> > to the same as you or anyone else. My experiences and such are different not because I am physically that much
> > different, but because my time and location are always different than anyone else's. My feeling that are outside of my
> > control - love, jealousy, possessiveness, joy, fear, have similar triggers as every other person on the planet, men more
> > so than women. Studies regarding the "smile" for instance, show that it is universal in humanity, along with
> > reproduction, territorial males, and more things than I can think of.
> >
> > a few statements to clarify:
> >
> > Each person is unique among people, but in the whole of things, we are interchangeable and similar in every way
> > Being similar in nature does not "devalue" existence/experience or pleasure from life - its just an observation.
> > There is simply an amount of variation in humanity that either functions, or does not - if not, Tim's Nazi pals, take
> > care of it for us. If so, they are probably not all that different from us.
> >
> > Bill Roh
> >
> But it is also true that neither one of us knows what the other's
> experience of the color red or the sound of middle C are. We only
> know that they refer to the same things because we can point to
> them for each other in a common world. They are certain
> frequencies scientifically; experiential qualia are horses of a
> different choler.