Re: virus: Re: The Fall of Buddhism

Corey A. Cook (cookcore@esuvm.emporia.edu)
Wed, 12 Mar 1997 12:56:31 -0800

I wrote:
>And it isn't like that? I couldn't quite make out your position
>on that statement, but I'll tell you mine. Right on! That is an
>excellent description of the mind. Except for the "validly" part.
>The mind perceives an objective reality, it just doesn't do it
>perfectly.

And David McFadzean replied:
>But the mind doesn't perceive objective reality per se. It perceives
>internal processes (thoughts, memories, feelings) and qualia or sense
>data, which is in fact information generated from the interaction between
>objective reality and the subject. From the sense data we can deduce
>what objective reality is like, but there is no way to perceive it
>directly.

I agree with what you say, except for one thing. We seem to have
seperate
ideas of just what the mind is. You seem to define it as only that part
which
is cognitive. I lump thoughts, memories, feelings and sense data with
cognition
and call that the mind. I don't know which one of us is right.

Corey A. Cook
cookcore@esuvm.emporia.edu

****************************
* The One Universal Truth: *
* Sometimes, you're wrong. *
****************************