[14:07]  Pema Pera: yes, just pick up where you left off, Yo
[14:07]  Yo Haiku: ok!
[14:08]  Yo Haiku: what we had so far, was to become clear about what the" giveneness" of experience is supposed to be
[14:08]  Yo Haiku: in other words, just the immediate field of consciousness at hand
[14:08]  Yo Haiku: what we immediately experience--just becoming aware of that.
[14:08]  Yo Haiku: so far so good?
[14:09]  Zen Arado: nods
[14:09]  Carlos Cornelius: yes
[14:09]  Yo Haiku: now, this immeidate field of awareness is our "normal" awareness,
[14:09]  Yo Haiku: and normally we don't really think about it but we just "have " it
[14:10]  Yo Haiku: we go about doing things and it's just our awareness of things
[14:10]  Rhiannon Dragoone: But isn't it how we analyze that normal field of experience that gives any meaning--and wouldn't that project us out of the field?
[14:10]  Yo Haiku: yes the analysis comes now--but the meaning, as you notice, is already there
[14:11]  Rhiannon Dragoone: Immediately create what Sartre called an ecsasis
[14:11]  Yo Haiku: as a part of our total experience
[14:11]  Rhiannon Dragoone: yes, put in a pre-cognitive way, wouldn't it?
[14:11]  Rhiannon Dragoone: *ecstasis
[14:12]  Yo Haiku: yes it is precognitive but our experiences are organized in a meaningful way already and we don't need analysis for it initially in our ordinary life
[14:12]  Rhiannon Dragoone: yes, but the meaning would still be something that we put in there, even if pre-reflective; so the experience of it as "already there" is illusory
[14:13]  Yo Haiku: but the point of phenomenology is to give an analysis of all this from the groud up
[14:13]  Zen Arado: I thought we had to add meaning cognitively?
[14:13]  Rhiannon Dragoone: not if its "already there."
[14:13]  Yo Haiku: wait wait
[14:13]  Bertram Jacobus: (sorry - have to leave - don´t feel bothered please - and have a good time all) ! ...
[14:13]  Yo Haiku: slow down, please
[14:13]  Rhiannon Dragoone: What i'm saying is that consciousness projects the meaning
[14:13]  Pema Pera: perhaps we can give Yo a chance to say a bit more before coming back to those kinds of criticisms?
[14:14]  Zen Arado: ok sorry
[14:14]  Pema Pera: once Yo has a chance to say what she means
[14:14]  Rhiannon Dragoone: np
[14:14]  Pema Pera: we can discuss it indepth
[14:14]  Pema Pera: (good questions, for sure, Rhiannon!)
[14:14]  Yo Haiku: the meaning projection comes way later
[14:14]  Rhiannon Dragoone: thanks, Perma
[14:15]  Yo Haiku: but first we have to see the structure of it all, so that we see just how the meaning-objects (noema) get established
[14:15]  Yo Haiku: but as I said this comes later
[14:15]  Yo Haiku: before the meaining business comes in
[14:16]  Yo Haiku: we still have to see if we can proceed with the first step of epoche
[14:16]  Yo Haiku: that is, to see in our "natural attitude" what kind of belief we have,
[14:17]  Yo Haiku: note that we are not saying we stop believing--for instance that things are out there and I am here and so on
[14:17]  Yo Haiku: but just to begin to see, what can I say about my experience
[14:17]  Yo Haiku: and what kind of things appear "real"
[14:17]  Yo Haiku: and take an inventory
[14:19]  Yo Haiku: so that we learn to see the difference between "seeing" (the stannce from which one could analyze the contents of consciousness) and "taking it as real" (one of the ordinary beliefs, among others, that produce the ontology ofthe natural attitude and natural science for most part
[14:20]  Yo Haiku: to notice this difference is the fist step in epoche, or "suspension"
[14:20]  Yo Haiku: questions? (I am sure there are many )
[14:21]  Rhiannon Dragoone: well, my question is still how we distinguish an actual experience of an object as real, and belief about it, as the consciousness is what projects both to us
[14:21]  Pema Pera is Offline
[14:22]  Yo Haiku: ok, 1.actual experience of an object as real
[14:22]  Yo Haiku: and 2. belief about it
[14:22]  Pema Pera is Online
[14:23]  Rhiannon Dragoone: yes, given that they both have an analytic, not an experiential structure
[14:23]  Yo Haiku: yes both are given in experience-consciousness
[14:23]  Yo Haiku: wait, experiential structure is there
[14:23]  Rhiannon Dragoone: how is it there, as doesn't consciousness, at least in ecstasis, project it there?
[14:24]  Yo Haiku: what I wanted to point out is the fact that in 1, 2. is already implicitly there
[14:24]  Yo Haiku: this particular way of putting consciousness is Sartrean but not quite Husserlian
[14:24]  Yo Haiku: I mean ecstasis
[14:24]  Rhiannon Dragoone: yes.
[14:25]  Yo Haiku: just be patient and follow the Husserlians for a moment
[14:25]  Rhiannon Dragoone: But the idea of meaning or reality being implicitly there seems to go back to the idea of there being an objective world without consciousness playing a part in its meaning
[14:25]  Yo Haiku: no, not necessarliy
[14:25]  Rhiannon Dragoone: well, that's my question
[14:26]  Pema Pera: the point is much simpler, Rhiannon: we start with what appears -- before even asking where it comes from
[14:26]  Pema Pera: like a person off the street -- not an intellectual
[14:27]  Yo Haiku: (for Husserlian phen the "meaning" gets established as a correlate of the meaning-giving cosciousness (noesis) and the meaning-object (noema) in intentionality
[14:27]  Rhiannon Dragoone: This is very interesting and i have a lot more questions. But there's a problem on Philosophy Island i have to help with.
[14:27]  Yo Haiku: but anyhow, yes, I wanted to start very simply
[14:27]  Rhiannon Dragoone: Thank you, Yo, for a stimulating lecture
[14:27]  Yo Haiku: without presupposing knowledge of philosophy
[14:27]  Pema Pera: bye Rhiannon!
[14:27]  Rhiannon Dragoone: Bye, Pema
[14:27]  Rhiannon Dragoone: I'll be back next week.
[14:27]  Pema Pera: yes, I would like us to be like Galileo
[14:28]  Pema Pera: he dropped some balls and started modern physics
[14:28]  Pema Pera: very very simple
[14:28]  Snowball Witte: bye Rhi
[14:28]  Pema Pera: just timing how long it takes for different objects to fall
[14:28]  Pema Pera: no differential equations yet :)
[14:28]  Yo Haiku: ok where were we..
[14:29]  Pema Pera: Yo Haiku: ok, 1.actual experience of an object as real
Yo Haiku: and 2. belief about it
[14:29]  Carlos Cornelius: the first step of epoche
[14:29]  Yo Haiku: yes, noticing the difference between "seeing a thing" simply in an ordinary way
[14:30]  Yo Haiku: and seeing that seeing (one step back) and start noticing what sort of things I may believe in avbout that first-level seeing
[14:32]  Yo Haiku: we just take it for granted, for example, that objects are out there and I am here
[14:32]  Yo Haiku: like two balls in space
[14:32]  Yo Haiku: but notice!
[14:32]  Zon Quar: so i see nad i know that i see ?
[14:32]  Zen Arado: can you do this with the sense of hearing? or is that unhelpful?
[14:32]  Yo Haiku: this is a particular picture, a "belief" of sorts,
[14:33]  Yo Haiku: yes you can hear as well--then your natural belief might be that the sound comes from "soemwehre" and I am here
[14:34]  Yo Haiku: just practice this noticing
[14:34]  Yo Haiku: again, not to dis-belief
[14:34]  Yo Haiku: but just notice the fact that beliefs are built into our ordinary experience
[14:34]  Zen Arado: but the brain immediately identifies the sound?
[14:35]  Zen Arado: how do you stop it doing that?
[14:35]  Yo Haiku: but once you notice them, you can "put on hold" as it were, as "things I believe"
[14:35]  Zen Arado: with practice?
[14:35]  Yo Haiku: zen--no, nothing to stop
[14:36]  Yo Haiku: just follow, but frm a distance so to speak
[14:36]  Yo Haiku: so that you see the fact of hearing
[14:36]  Zen Arado: ah just notice it doing it ?
[14:36]  Yo Haiku: yes, to start
[14:36]  Yo Haiku: notice you don't need a brain story so far
[14:37]  Yo Haiku: I hear a sound, and I notice I hear a sound, and
[14:37]  Yo Haiku: I might believe the sound comes from "somewhere"
[14:37]  Zon Quar: so interesting..but so late for me goodnight all
[14:37]  Zen Arado: bye Zon
[14:37]  Yo Haiku: but the immediate fact is that the sound is there as the immediate content of experience
[14:38]  Yo Haiku: just notice the difference between this content vs. all that one can say about it (the part loaded with beliefs) and say,
[14:38]  Yo Haiku: wow I have lots to say (and take an inventory) no need to discard
[14:39]  Yo Haiku: the "suspension of beliefs" in the epoche process let you see the difference between the content of experience/cosnciousness
[14:40]  Yo Haiku: vs. the strucutal, "scientific," or "empirical," or "psychological", and other "accounts" that are supposed to explain what your are experiencing
[14:41]  Yo Haiku: but once you see the beliefs for what they are,
[14:41]  Yo Haiku: you can also take a closer look atthe contents of consciousness itself
[14:42]  Yo Haiku: and produce a phenomenological account--which would be different from other accounts that you already have had, as beliefs
[14:43]  Zen Arado: it's a bit like stepping back from your thoughts during meditation ? Or have I got it wrong?
[14:43]  Yo Haiku: (notice, "beliefs" may not appear as beliefs but "reality" as they are so firmly believed to the point of hard-reality)
[14:43]  Yo Haiku: zen--yes I think it is similar, at least the process of stepping back
[14:44]  Zen Arado: ok thanks
[14:44]  Pema Pera: not to interrupt, Yo, but perhaps we can ask at some point whether anyone here has tried to do the epoche, and what kind of difficulties they encountered in doing so?
[14:44]  Yo Haiku: yes I was about to ask something similar
[14:44]  Yo Haiku: this just have to be "tried"
[14:45]  Carlos Cornelius: I have tried, and I think I can follow everythig you say, until I start comparing epoche with other attitudes one can take towards phenomenal experiences
[14:45]  Carlos Cornelius: then i get lost
[14:45]  Yo Haiku: other attitudes such as psychology?
[14:46]  Carlos Cornelius: no, other attitudes such as suppossing, disbelieving, assuming, etc
[14:46]  Carlos Cornelius: nothing about psychology
[14:46]  Yo Haiku: ok
[14:46]  Calvino Rabeni: Can a phon pratitioner communicate the particulars of the experience
[14:47]  Carlos Cornelius: i just don't see the big difference
[14:47]  Carlos Cornelius: plus as Calvino suggests, i don't see how to reach any consensus regarding this kind of practice
[14:48]  Zen Arado: isn't it a kind of neutral stance?
[14:48]  Calvino Rabeni: Just asking, not consensus but- one person describing how it appeared while doing it
[14:48]  Calvino Rabeni: Or some "how to" tips?
[14:48]  Yo Haiku: ok (let me see)
[14:49]  Carlos Cornelius: i thought consensus was pretty important for the "experimental" approach to epoche
[14:50]  Yo Haiku: "consensus" would come when one describes the structure of consciousness
[14:50]  Calvino Rabeni: practice before consensuc
[14:50]  Yo Haiku: but not about a particular object
[14:51]  Pema Pera: Here is a suggestion: on the VIP email group, if some of us would describe their attempt of doing the epoche, in a few paragraphs, Yoko/Yo and I could give our responses, as to how that compares with our understanding of the epoche; and with some luck Andrea/Jovanotti can join in as well.
[14:51]  Calvino Rabeni: excellent thanks
[14:51]  Yo Haiku: I think I am getting to see the worries
[14:52]  Pema Pera: email is a better medium for comparing experiences -- paragraphs rather than sound bites -- and time to think :-)
[14:52]  Yo Haiku: good idea
[14:52]  Carlos Cornelius: ok
[14:52]  Carlos Cornelius: i won't be available in the next two weeks, unfortunatley
[14:52]  Yo Haiku: gives me time to think about what to say
[14:52]  Pema Pera: you're doing fine, Yo!
[14:52]  Pema Pera: the problem is that the shift inherent in the epoche is too simple in a way to explain
[14:53]  Pema Pera: you have to do it and recognize the possibility
[14:53]  Pema Pera: You talked about reality and belief, Yo:
[14:53]  Pema Pera: yes, to see that the "real world" is a belief is essential -- possibly a correct belief, but a belief nonetheless.
[14:53]  Pema Pera: can we do that?
[14:53]  Pema Pera: easily
[14:53]  Yo Haiku: I also think the worries come from another, deeper belief about the "subjective" in experience
[14:53]  Pema Pera: do we know how to do that? well, let's help each other to step in
[14:54]  Pema Pera: yes, we simply have to put all our other beliefs on hold
[14:54]  Pema Pera: like shoes, take them off before you enter the room
[14:54]  Pema Pera: the epoche is like a precious carpet, yuo don't want to soil it :)
[14:54]  Yo Haiku: also perhaps a better word for "belief"
[14:54]  Pema Pera: conviction?
[14:54]  Carlos Cornelius: ok, here is another huge source of confussion for me that came up before
[14:55]  Pema Pera: autmatic pilot?
[14:55]  Yo Haiku: yes Carlos?
[14:55]  Carlos Cornelius: I just don't see why this claim about beliefs in reality when one see, or deep convictions about physics etc. is true
[14:55]  Carlos Cornelius: I just see things
[14:56]  Yo Haiku: yes, ok
[14:57]  Yo Haiku: and in this seeing, what comes as the narrative account?
[14:57]  Carlos Cornelius: can someone clarify to me how is seeing things loaded with convictions that I can then bracket?
[14:57]  Zen Arado: philosophy already taught me to hold 'beliefs'very loosley - but that isn't the epoche?
[14:57]  Carlos Cornelius: these "convictions" seem to be pragmatic, rather than deep beliefs about reality
[14:58]  Yo Haiku: that is an interesting point, Carlos
[14:58]  Yo Haiku: but what we are calling deep beliefs are tucked in there
[14:58]  Carlos Cornelius: I trust them because they work
[14:58]  Calvino Rabeni: There is a distinction about beliefs - if you can drop them, then in a sense they are not beliefs -
[14:59]  Carlos Cornelius: Maybe, but if they work so well, what is it that we are trying to achieve by bracketing them?
[14:59]  Pema Pera: dropping is not the point, Calvino -- SEEING them is the point
[14:59]  Calvino Rabeni: there are the "just true" beliefs, and the "i know I hold" beliefs
[14:59]  Pema Pera: a fundamentalist Christian can talk about his/her belief
[14:59]  Calvino Rabeni: same I think,Pema
[14:59]  Pema Pera: and is in fact aware of it!
[15:00]  Pema Pera: but normally we are not aware of our "act of belief" in everyday pragmatic situations
[15:00]  Pema Pera: and by become aware of them, we gain freedom
[15:00]  Pema Pera: we can play with them
[15:00]  Pema Pera: there is where our way parts from fundamentalists, btw
[15:00]  Calvino Rabeni: freedom todrop, appears at that point through that act
[15:00]  Pema Pera: drop, or just wear loosely
[15:00]  Carlos Cornelius: OK, sorry to interrupt but I have to leave. Nice talking to you. Thanks Yo!
[15:00]  Pema Pera: the point is freedom from identification -- not freedom from identity totally
[15:01]  Zen Arado: yes things we think are so obviously true we don't even notice them?