Jackson’s review of All Things Are Full of Gods: The Mysteries of Mind and Life > Likes and Comments
27 likes · Like
Fine review Jackson. I’m in the midst of this book now. And taking it slow, no other way.
Did you not think that for a monist Psyche uses an awfully dualist language? Almost entirety of the book she argues that matter is manifestation of Mind. Even you say in your review "Matter descends from mind". What is this if not a dualist language? If Matter is Mind and Mind is Matter then the question of what comes first makes no sense. It becomes part of one another. Then theories like Eric Chaisson's "organic/inorganic life are only a matter of degree" and "Consiossness is an intrinsic property of the universe, even in the smallest particles, that could give rise to an emergence phenomenon of private experience" become virtually the same thing that Psyche argues for, only in a different, "bottom-up" language, which Psyche does not like so much.
I felt like Psyche, and DBH by extension, was way too determent to "win" the debate and insist on her use of "spiritual", mostly dualistic, language, than any monist should have been.
I have also dropped a review for this book. Eager to talk about it to someone, not much audience here at Goodreads.
back to top
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Jim
(new)
Nov 20, 2024 11:22AM
Fine review Jackson. I’m in the midst of this book now. And taking it slow, no other way.
reply
|
flag
Did you not think that for a monist Psyche uses an awfully dualist language? Almost entirety of the book she argues that matter is manifestation of Mind. Even you say in your review "Matter descends from mind". What is this if not a dualist language? If Matter is Mind and Mind is Matter then the question of what comes first makes no sense. It becomes part of one another. Then theories like Eric Chaisson's "organic/inorganic life are only a matter of degree" and "Consiossness is an intrinsic property of the universe, even in the smallest particles, that could give rise to an emergence phenomenon of private experience" become virtually the same thing that Psyche argues for, only in a different, "bottom-up" language, which Psyche does not like so much.I felt like Psyche, and DBH by extension, was way too determent to "win" the debate and insist on her use of "spiritual", mostly dualistic, language, than any monist should have been.
I have also dropped a review for this book. Eager to talk about it to someone, not much audience here at Goodreads.
