| Dear Neither,
That’s an interesting point.
In the email exchange with the physicist I refer to within my essay, I noted that I didn’t see how there could be even an illusion of motion without something actually moving. After all, the series of still frames within a movie film moves through a projector to render the illusion of motion upon the screen. He agreed with the point, but sort of just stuck to his guns, basically saying there must be some explanation.
I think Parmenides and his ace disciple Zeno were exactly right in their intuitive positioning of reality being static, with motion being a mere illusion. None of the alleged "resolutions” of Zeno’s paradoxes that I have read seem conclusive to me.
I believe there is a way of reconciling the problem which would explain much, if true.
Here is a well-known Zen story:
Two monks were watching a flag waving in the wind. They disputed which was actually moving. One maintained it was the flag, while the other said it was the wind. Their master happened upon the debate and resolved the issue with: “Neither. Mind moves.”
Is consciousness an epiphenomenon of matter, as Western thought holds, or visa versa as Eastern metaphysical thought maintains? I think if the latter should be true, it would explain a great many things, including the concept of cause and effect.
--Don  |