Re: PSYCH/PHIL: We ARE the Experience

Dan Fabulich (
Sun, 26 Jan 1997 23:13:30 -0800

David Musick wrote:

> Do you want to know what you are? Behold yourself! That's what you are. You
> are this. This Very Experience. You are right here, in all the details of
> this very moment. Every feeling, every sensation, every thought, every memory
> or impression; that is *you*! The *awareness* of the world, of other people,
> of plants and animals and everything; that *awareness* is you. Everything you
> encounter is within you, for you to even be aware of it. The moving colors
> and sounds may come from an outside source (an objective world), but the
> sensations themselves become an intergral part of you as soon as you are aware
> of them. You *are* that awareness; you *are* that sensation. If it's
> experienced, then it is already part of you; for you *are* that experience.

Fascinating. I agree with almost everything you have to say...

To clarify, however, I am not David Musick, nor am I my keyboard, my
screen, or your e-mail. I am [perceiving these things]. Why
differentiate? Because on some level, our definition stems equally
from what we are and what we are NOT. Our distinction becomes us.

I would also argue that experience is not ALL of us. There is even more
than that. While our experiences make up the majority of the
philosophical "self," you can't deny the parts that don't contribute to
that "self." Pluck out a hair if you're interested. You, on some
level are [observing]. Part of you is also hair.

As far as the mechanics of explaining this process, I've made a feeble
attempt at doing so by utilizing the verb "to be" and brackets. The
verb "to be" is the only verb in the English language which circumvents
the chasm of subject/object, since the subject in a clause whose main
verb is "to be" is also the object; they are reflexively interchangable.
I am [listening to opera]. I am [thinking about your point]. I am
[remembering a rainbow].

> We are ephemeral, transient patterns, rising from other patterns and flowing
> on to become something else. From moment to moment, experiencing the reality
> that we are. We are this; This Very Moment.

There's another interesting point here, however, and that is the premise
that immortality would be unachievable, as we are ever-changing, ever-
growing, and ever-dying. That needn't be the case. Uploading yourself
could put a halt to this process, if your "self-image" is never
activated. You could exist on file for centuries. As immortality
goes, that's not much to look forward to, but I rankle at the
suggestion that immortality is IMPOSSIBLE... Even in the philosophical
sense, it is POSSIBLE, if undesirable.

-He who laughs last thinks slowest-