-------------------------------------------------------
Mariela Szirko asked me to distribute this message
in order to clarify some misunderstandings.
Herbert Muller
-------------------------------------------------------

Subject:
CLEARING SPLITTINGS UP

by Mariela Szirko

Dear colleagues,

I cannot participate in the discussion. Just a fleeting perusal on your exchanges profferred to me the gratification of witnessing a ripening interlocking of your views.

For a full fortnight I did not look at my e-mail, and among the lot I found three private letters from members of our Forum, on the indictment of 'Cartesian' Herbert kindly fulminated onto a certain doctrine mistakenly associated with my worldviews. I also found Herbert's own message, quoted hereinafter.

In my local situation, at which several among you got in my JCS-online postings of March 24 and May 13, I am taking more and more responsabilities; our Director did not recover still. Neither clumsily nor conscientiously I can engage in our Forum's exchanges, much as I wish. Yet, I feel accountable to redress erbert's interpretation, specially because in the last 98 years nobody in our tradition could ever have been remotely suspected of Cartesianism - nor was.


Herbert wrote: '[26] Mariela Szirko writes (N1) that she cannot deal with my article because it presents a monopsychist view.'

Although I did not dwell upon this concept, it certainly covers the Asian forms as well as the Islam monopsychism, of course the Latin Averroism, and the contemporary "quantum" Pythagoric-Parmenidean worldviews -- even Husserl's before 1925. Herbert continued:'This interpretation presupposes her belief in mind-independent reality, or perhaps mopre accurately in this case: the possibility of a reality-independent mind which can neglect nature,'

Certainly the first (that is, denial of the Pythagoric-Parmenidean tradition) does not include the second: there are many other alternatives in that denial, which not embrace such an aloof specter. Herbert received some further introductory materials, but I was barely able to answer him only on a first round of questions before becoming powerless to devote further time to clarify. Anyway, the heritage in whose notional atmosphere I breathe denies the Pythagoric-Parmenidean worldview, showing that its struggle against time comes from a historic confusion between what we could call animal psychisms as a comprehensive class (but they will call it human mind) and a supernatural logos.

This issue -- viz. that of the sparkle of the divine essence, as Macrobe says; or, the consubstantiality of natural minds and supernatural logos -- is a very well known point in classical studies, central i. e., to those of the Orphism-Pythagorism and of the penetration of oriental worldviews in the Roman empire. Thus Herbert's addition renders inaccurately, not more accurately, his concept. On the so forged penchant, he added: 'and thus it implies her acceptance of the Cartesian split.

'Egad! What a shameful outcome, once having written more than fifty essays against it! But, in fact, no: it is just that Herbert here uses the notion indiscriminatingly, as so many innocents around the world who aver "nazi" and "communist" and "yankee" every uniformed violent figure in the movies of the 1940's. I am a simple neurobiochemist who underwent classical studies in our transdisciplinary tradition, but I understand that the crucial academic tool on this point is the ability to identify if a splitting exists, and thereafter refinedly locating it at the noematic-noetic range. No splitting exists -- and many people were socially chastised in this last 98 years-stage for having defended that point of view here -- and I am proud of being just so admant on this tenet as most of my pluralist tradition is. Surely, among more than 4000 persons with an accepted pluralism, unity is just a matter of convergences, and some marginals might have set a non-substantial splitting amid other ontological constituents of the particular entities.

But never, never, nary one of them, bagged noemata and noesis together into a res cogitans contraposed to inert dispersivity. Nor executed any other of the possible baggings that yield the diverse emplacements of the splittings over the mentioned axis.

In fact, I not believed to have given any ocassion for so serious a mistake. The very fragments quoted by Herbert prevent so coarse a misinterpretation, as it seems me ostensible:

' Mariela Szirko: writes that she cannot analyze my paper because it is tributary of monopsychism ... 'I am writing from a scholarly tradition in neurobiology and psychophysics which is rather secluded ... Conceptually the main difference is made by our hylozoist stance ... Among the peculiarities of our stance is the emphasis on semoviency in psychisms. This term, semoviency, probably an acceptably-founded neologism in English, may be best described as 'exemption of reactivity' or 'starting causal physical series 'a novo' '. This special kind of self-activation collides with standard cultural expectations regarding what happens in supraquantum nature ... a stealthy collision very influential on our work.' She is interested in discussion with physicists. - She refers to a monograph by Alicia Avila and M.F.Crocco, 'Sensing: A new fundamental action of nature', working manuscript, Ctr. Neurobiological Res., Ministry of Health and Welfare, Buenos Aires, 1996, and to her own postings in JCS-online, earlier in 1997. (Mariela Szirko is Professor, Centro de Investigaciones Neurobiologicas, Ministry of Health and Welfare, Argentine Republic, Buenos Aires) <postmaster@neubio.sld.ar> '

The lesson? E-mail has limitations! In a few minutes talking, it all would have been cleared up. It is needed to be specially careful when encountering sizable corpora worked out outside mainstreams, and Internet precisemailing, but Herbert has several long excerpta of the aforementioned official monograph. These excerpta may satisfy the interested colleagues that wrote infructuously to me -I wholeheartedly apologize- and I am sure Herbert will post them to our Forum to eventually supply my forced silence.

Cyberkisses for everybody!

Mariela
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
Prof. Mariela Szirko,
<postmaster@neubio.sld.ar>
Centro de Investig. Neurobiologicas, Ministry of Health & Welfare, Argentine Republic; and Lab. of Electroneurobiological Res., Neuropsychiatric Hospital "Dr. Jose Tiburcio Borda",
Buenos Aires City Govt., Office: Phone/Fax (54 1) 306 -7314e -mail <postmaster@neubio.gov.ar>
Standard disclaimer: Las opiniones de esta mensaje son personales y no comprometen las dependencias a cargo de la firmante
Reply to THIS message, ONLY to: <postmaster@neubio.sld.ar>
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=