2009/8/16 Rex Allen <rexallen...@gmail.com>:
> On Sat, Aug 15, 2009 at 9:11 PM, David Nyman<david.ny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Here's what I think is the problem with all this:
> Hmmmm. I didn't see anything in your post that seemed like an actual
> problem for my view.
But weren't you were arguing that your view of explanation and meaning
as 'uncaused', in some ultimate sense, rendered them pointless? My
rejoinder was that the point of departure for any existential
encounter is always contextual - or situated - and our task is to
explore ways of relating meaningfully to this situation; hence to
deplore the lack of an appeal to 'external' justification amounts to
'false consciousness'. Do you agree?
> As I think my "virtual-gas" example illustrated, meaning is
> subjective, like conscious experience. That shared property of
> subjectivity is significant I think.
> What I think I can safely say is: meaning is a facet of conscious
> experience, not something that exists separately from (or independent
> of) conscious experience.
Well, meaning is a facet of our mutual situation, which is revealed in
> I think a facet/gemstone analogy is appropriate here: The facet
> doesn't exist separate from the gemstone, and can't be considered
> independently of the gemstone. Neither can the gemstone be considered
> independently of it's facets.
> Conscious experience being the gemstone, and 'meaning' be a facet of
> that gemstone, of course. (Just trying to reduce the target size for
> Brent's one-line zingers!)
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at