What we have here is burgeoning awareness that "self and other" *may* be as big a fantasy as "soul and meat". Dualisms are funny things.
A great deal depends on how you look at it.
Where does "I" end and "it" begin? Where does "I" end and "you" begin?
What was your face before you were born? Show me.
>> This sounds no different to me from the Christian Apocalypse &
>> Resurrection.
As G. Spencer Brown said, the symbol = may be taken to mean "is confused with". Maybe we should use that incisive brain to look harder at the individual pieces of the proposition, rather than adopting an all-or-none approach. Then again, maybe not, what do I know? :)
>>e're supposed to regress back into the womb, the void,
>> from everything back to nothing, renouncing our worldly 'sins'! Isn't
>> that wonderful?
Maybe. How different, really, is that notion from the Big Crunch? If you believe you can outlast that, we're talking metaphysics anyway; hunker down, have some vittles and we'll jaw. :)
>Not very wonderful at all, really. I'm still not sure of the full
>implications of my theory above, but I certainly hope that it doesn't mean
>that there's only one consciousness in the universe. That sounds pretty
>dull to me.
Mebbe. You can always play "let's pretend there's me and you"--which is a philosophy with a long and motley heritage.
BTW, FWIW, I'm dead serious about everything. All hail Eris--or don't.
:)
MMB
<center>BOUNCE WARNING: A simple reply to the above address will fail.
If you wish to send me a _noncommercial_ message, kindly substitute a
hyphen for the asterisk.
</center>