folder 53 - 015

OverviewTranscribeVersions

Facsimile

Transcription

53 page 015

C-3

whatever "space" + "time" may signify here; in any case "rest" + "motion" are meaningful terms, + the objects exist purely in one or the other of these two modes. Position -relatedness- is everything but I am not at all sure if this involves space, or at least space as we conceive of it. This may explain why I've always felt about 2-3-74 that somehow time had been converted into space, but this being so (let us say it is so) what you wind up with, then, is another kind of space entirely. I want to say you get space that remembers. This has to do with the meta-abstraction. You cannot speak of "one mother twice" without introducing the element of recognition + this has precisely to do with memory. This has to do with things that exist never ceasing to exist (somehow) +, strangely, this was Parmenides' whole thrust: if something exists, it must always have existed (in the past) + must always continue to exist (in the future). Things either are or are not (to on vs meden.) As to the latter category it is unintelligible, so it can't even be thought about. This reasoning led Parmenides to assert that Form II itself although seeming to exist -taken by men to exist- does not in fact exist (because there can be no grades or degrees of being: to on means to on + that is that). Now, if motion + change are impossible but only seeming, you would get "space that remembers" because in fact the object is always where it is + only seems to move. I could say, when it "moves" it as it were takes its space with it; therefore it -the object- remains in the same space always. But if this is so, we have no idea at all what the term "space" actually signifies if it signifies anything at all. An instance of this, just recently discovered is the hologram quality of memory in the human brain, in which a given memory is somehow distributed everywhere in the brain. Because of holograms we understand this, but 50 years ago, such an assertion would have seemed unintelligible. How can a thing be everywhere? + yet in a hologram this is the case. The total

Page Notes

Nobody has written a note for this page yet

Please sign in to write a note for this page