I a not sure if Rovelli has thought about matters a lot?
It starts getting subject-related at approximately 3:00
Jaimungal meets Rovelli
Re: Jaimungal meets Rovelli
At around 1:40m he talks about reality being made up of events or moments. Later he writes off a consciousness based ontology - using the buddhist idea of ephemeral moments rather than a unitary subjectivity.
My question: how long is an event? at what point does one event end and another begin?
My question: how long is an event? at what point does one event end and another begin?
Re: Jaimungal meets Rovelli
Well, that's a Theravadian idea (interpretation). In Mahayana the unitary subjectivity (Buddha's nature) is not an event but a continuous, or rather timeless, reality.
- Soul_of_Shu
- Posts: 2023
- Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2021 6:48 pm
- Contact:
Re: Jaimungal meets Rovelli
I've not watched this yet, and I suppose I should give it a chance based on the apparent fascination of others here, and BK's plug for CR's 'Relational QM Model' as being one that is worth investigating for being compatible with a consciousness based ontology, but other than that possible concession, I'm finding it hard to muster sufficient appeal to invest in it. Can someone make a good succinct case for the fascination with Rovelli, as if he's some latent closet idealist, oh-so-close to coming out, if not so wary of being associated with 'spirituality', as opposed to being just another deeply entrenched, locked-in, mind-in-here/world-out-there dualist?Starbuck wrote: ↑Mon Dec 20, 2021 12:22 pm At around 1:40m he talks about reality being made up of events or moments. Later he writes off a consciousness based ontology - using the buddhist idea of ephemeral moments rather than a unitary subjectivity.
My question: how long is an event? at what point does one event end and another begin?
Here out of instinct or grace we seek
soulmates in these galleries of hieroglyph and glass,
where mutual longings and sufferings of love
are laid bare in transfigured exhibition of our hearts,
we who crave deep secrets and mysteries,
as elusive as the avatars of our dreams.
soulmates in these galleries of hieroglyph and glass,
where mutual longings and sufferings of love
are laid bare in transfigured exhibition of our hearts,
we who crave deep secrets and mysteries,
as elusive as the avatars of our dreams.
Re: Jaimungal meets Rovelli
Indeed. The Theravadans were weary of the claiming of any self whatsoever - even a unitary one. The focus is on enlightenment rather than any ontological claim. Rovelli seems very agnostic about ontology so it suits his worldview, and allows space for a subtle materialism.
Re: Jaimungal meets Rovelli
Well, the relational interpretation is metaphysically agnostic but it's compatible with and allows for almost any ontology, idealism included. So it's a fair game.Starbuck wrote: ↑Mon Dec 20, 2021 2:22 pm Indeed. The Theravadans were weary of the claiming of any self whatsoever - even a unitary one. The focus is on enlightenment rather than any ontological claim. Rovelli seems very agnostic about ontology so it suits his worldview, and allows space for a subtle materialism.
-
- Posts: 490
- Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2021 6:15 pm
Re: Jaimungal meets Rovelli
Starbuck wrote: Indeed. The Theravadans were weary of the claiming of any self whatsoever - even a unitary one. The focus is on enlightenment rather than any ontological claim. Rovelli seems very agnostic about ontology so it suits his worldview, and allows space for a subtle materialism.
Both excellent points!Eugene wrote:Well, the relational interpretation is metaphysically agnostic but it's compatible with and allows for almost any ontology, idealism included. So it's a fair game.
Re: Jaimungal meets Rovelli
Its not a fair game as the odds are tilted to materialism as the default setting, but I get your wider point!Eugene I. wrote: ↑Mon Dec 20, 2021 2:30 pmWell, the relational interpretation is metaphysically agnostic but it's compatible with and allows for almost any ontology, idealism included. So it's a fair game.Starbuck wrote: ↑Mon Dec 20, 2021 2:22 pm Indeed. The Theravadans were weary of the claiming of any self whatsoever - even a unitary one. The focus is on enlightenment rather than any ontological claim. Rovelli seems very agnostic about ontology so it suits his worldview, and allows space for a subtle materialism.