Of another world

[davem]

I think the point is that, in effect, all philosophies, religions, worldviews begin as 'secondary worlds'. They may be in intention models of the primary world, but they all begin as fantasy worlds, same as stories.

What we refer to as 'myths', 'legends', folktales, were in origin models of the primary world. They only became 'secondary' worlds when they were replaced by a different model - one which may have subsequently been replaced by yet another.

Of course, a 'secondary' world may (as in the case of Middle-earth) have always been intended to be a 'secondary' world - though its possible that some mad dictator may attempt to make the primary world like M-e through genetic engineering & landscaping, etc.

The point being, a 'secondary world' can be the model of the primary world which you have in your head at this moment. If my model of the Primary does not match yours then effectively we do not inhabit the same, 'primary', reality, do we? Hence, all our 'primary' worlds are a step away from reality & are therefore 'secondary', inventions that are either unique or shared with a few others ('living shapes that move from mind to mind'). In other words, LMP's 'primary' world (Christianity) is, to me, a 'secondary one' as it is one that is only 'real' in Tolkien's 'secondary' sense, no more rooted in the primary than is M-e.

[littlemanpoet]

Originally Posted by davem

If my model of the Primary does not match yours then effectively we do not inhabit the same, 'primary', reality, do we?

In brief, if you are Cartesian, then no. I'm not Cartesian. I don't exist in my head. I exist in reality. I'm pretty sure you do too. So regardless of what model is in your head, where you really are is still the primary world, even if you don't choose to believe it.

[davem]

Originally Posted by littlemanpoet

In brief, if you are Cartesian, then no. I'm not Cartesian. I don't exist in my head. I exist in reality. I'm pretty sure you do too. So regardless of what model is in your head, where you really are is still the primary world, even if you don't choose to believe it.

Define 'reality'. Is it where my body is, or where my mind is?

Define 'mind'. Is it limited to 'reality' - ie the 'primary' world, or can it also exist in a secondary world?

Am 'I' my mind, or my body, (or my soul or my spirit)?

[drigel]

Hence, all our 'primary' worlds are a step away from reality & are therefore 'secondary', inventions that are either unique or shared with a few others ('living shapes that move from mind to mind'). In other words, LMP's 'primary' world (Christianity) is, to me, a 'secondary one' as it is one that is only 'real' in Tolkien's 'secondary' sense, no more rooted in the primary than is M-e.

It's still all about perception. Or, levels of voluntary hallucination.

But if one subscribes to this line of thought, I still say the concept of a higher power could still fit in the picture. In other words -

The point being, a 'secondary world' can be the model of the primary world which you have in your head at this moment. If my model of the Primary does not match yours then effectively we do not inhabit the same, 'primary', reality, do we?

Then our primary should also be derived from a higher model. Or, again in other words, from whose head did our primary spring from? Otherwise, we are the ultimate masters of the universe, or delusional animals.

[davem]

Originally Posted by drigel

Then our primary should also be derived from a higher model. Or, again in other words, from whose head did our primary spring from? Otherwise, we are the ultimate masters of the universe, or delusional animals.

Not sure this follows – the use of 'higher' in this context is possibly a bit misleading as it implies superiority – a 'higher' power etc. There's no reason to bring in a 'higher' mind.

Of course, I don't deny the possibility of such a 'being'. I've had experiences which could be labelled 'psychic' or 'mystical' (which, incidentally, I neither believe nor disbelieve – or even attempt to 'explain' come to that. They were simply 'experiences'. Quite possibly part of my particular 'delusion').

I wouldn't consider myself a 'master of the universe' (not while Lalwende is around) & my natural humility (which other Downers will vouch for) inclines me more towards thinking of myself as a 'delusional animal'.

[drigel]

Originally Posted by davem

Not sure this follows – the use of 'higher' in this context is possibly a bit misleading as it implies superiority – a 'higher' power etc. There's no reason to bring in a 'higher' mind.

Nor should there be a reason to deny a higher power. Except the absense of humility. Or, instead of asking: "..... from whose head did our primary spring from?", I should have asked "From whose loins did our primary spring from?" Higher Mind is misleading and not what I was striving for there. Power would be more apt.

Dont get me wrong, im just suggesting here.

Of course, I don't deny the possibility of such a 'being'. I've had experiences which could be labelled 'psychic' or 'mystical' (which, incidentally, I neither believe nor disbelieve – or even attempt to 'explain' come to that. They were simply 'experiences'. Quite possibly part of my particular 'delusion').

Or quite possibly a touch of something of a higher nature than yourself. Your "labels" might be substandard in describing the context of what you experienced.

[davem]

Originally Posted by drigel

Nor should there be a reason to deny a higher power. Except the absense of humility. Or, instead of asking: "..... from whose head did our primary spring from?", I should have asked "From whose loins did our primary spring from?" Higher Mind is misleading and not what I was striving for there. Power would be more apt.

Dont get me wrong, im just suggesting here.

I wouldn't deny the possibility, but I don't think 'belief' helps there. You can believe in any kind of 'higher power'. I think its dangerous to stray into the area of 'intelligent design' without more support than the 'God of the gaps'. I can't explain how the primary world came to be, but I don't think that's sufficient justification for positing a Creator.

Or quite possibly a touch of something of a higher nature than yourself. Your "labels" might be substandard in describing the context of what you experienced.

They might well. The danger is that you construct (or adopt) a very convoluted 'belief' in a 'God' to account for your experience. Just because you experience something doesn't mean you can explain it accurately. I & a man living 1,000 years ago both experienced seeing the sun on the eastern horizon at dawn, at different places in the sky throughout the day & on the western horizon at evening, but we interpret the experience in different ways. For him the Sun moved around a stationary earth, for me its the opposite. All I know is what I actually experience.

[alatar]

Originally Posted by davem

I think the point is that, in effect, all philosophies, religions, worldviews begin as 'secondary worlds'. They may be in intention models of the primary world, but they all begin as fantasy worlds, same as stories.

I'm with you. I would just want these models to be not only explanatory but reliably predictive if they are used in certain arenas. If you always got rain after sacrificing a virgin to the volcano, then maybe you have something there I can use.

Of course, a 'secondary' world may (as in the case of Middle-earth) have always been intended to be a 'secondary' world - though its possible that some mad dictator may attempt to make the primary world like M-e through genetic engineering & landscaping, etc.

Dagnabit, davem, quit spying on me! Engineering elven ears is hard enough without having Monday morning geneticists telling me that they're not pointy enough (or too pointy) or should look more like cabbage leaves. Shhh!

The point being, a 'secondary world' can be the model of the primary world which you have in your head at this moment. If my model of the Primary does not match yours then effectively we do not inhabit the same, 'primary', reality, do we? Hence, all our 'primary' worlds are a step away from reality & are therefore 'secondary', inventions that are either unique or shared with a few others ('living shapes that move from mind to mind'). In other words, LMP's 'primary' world (Christianity) is, to me, a 'secondary one' as it is one that is only 'real' in Tolkien's 'secondary' sense, no more rooted in the primary than is M-e.

I'm no philosopher or deep thinker, but think that we all work with a projection of the real world within our heads. You and I see the same wavelength of light and think 'orange' - even if I see it as grey and you see it more yellow than red. We have our own pretty little universes between our ears, and it's amazing that when they bump up against each other that there's any congruence. But we've worked that out for some things and not for others.