[userpic]

Re: Ага, патитура уже совпадает, но тональность все еще н 

ailev в посте Openmeta (оригинал в ЖЖ)

"непосредственное восприятие" в обсуждаемом вопросе социально задаваемых КритериевВажности... Уилбер замечает (http://wilber.shambhala.com/html/books/kosmos/excerptD/part1.cfm):
One of the first and most important suggested changes in the development of postmetaphysics is that the idea of perception be replaced by perspective. The great wisdom traditions and philosopher-sages (from Plotinus to Shankara to Gautama Buddha to Hegel to Aurobindo to Whitehead) built much of their interpretive frameworks with the concept of perception (as awareness/consciousness): the nature of this moment perceives, grasps, or prehends various phenomena; these perceptions or moments of bare attention are the "building blocks" of a sentient, panpsychic world; the resultant network of perceptions is an Indra's Net of mutually perceiving and interdependent relationships. The power, beauty, and goodness of those great metaphysical systems are, I believe, undeniable.
But there are no perceptions anywhere in the real world; there are only perspectives. A subject perceiving an object is always already in a relationship of first-person, second-person, and third-person when it comes to the perceived occasions. If the manifest world is indeed panpsychic—or built of sentient beings (all the way up, all the way down)—then the manifest world is built of perspectives, not perceptions. Moving from perceptions to perspectives is the first radical step in the move from metaphysics to post-metaphysics. Subjects don't prehend objects anywhere in the universe; rather, first persons prehend second persons or third persons: perceptions are always within actual perspectives. "Subject perceiving object" (or "bare attention to dharmas") is not a raw given but a low-order abstraction that already tears the fabric of the Kosmos in ways that cannot easily be repaired.
("First person" perspective means the perspective of the person speaking—I, singular, or we, plural. "Second person" means the person spoken to—you or thou. "Third person" means the person or thing spoken of—he, she, they, them, it, its. More generally, first person is any holon with agency or intentionality; second person is any holon to whom agency is directed; third person is any holon referred to. We will see examples of these perspectives as we proceed.)
И там много в том же духе. То есть не "непосредственное восприятие", а "непосредственное видЕние" что ли (ибо perspective -- перспектива, ракурс, проекция, вид. Не скажешь же "непосредственное ракурсирование", хотя я бы склонялся именно к этому варианту, его ни с чем не спутаешь ;)

13 комментариев

сначала старые сначала новые