Reminds me of the story of the CEO who began his address to the annual shareholders' meeting with the statement:
"Last year our company stood at the edge of the abyss; this year we have taken a giant leap forwards ..." :-) Francis On 22 Feb., 19:47, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > The master of > words...http://www.quotationspage.com/quotes/Professor_Irwin_Coreyhttp://www.thomaspynchon.com/gravitys-rainbow/extra/corey.html > > On Feb 22, 8:56 am, frantheman <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > The wisdom of Lewis Carroll: > > > 'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, > > `it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less.' > > `The question is,' said Alice, `whether you can make words mean so > > many different things.' > > `The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, `which is to be master -- > > that's all.' > > Alice was too much puzzled to say anything; so after a minute Humpty > > Dumpty began again. `They've a temper, some of them -- particularly > > verbs: they're the proudest -- adjectives you can do anything with, > > but not verbs -- however, I can manage the whole lot of them! > > Impenetrability! That's what I say!' > > `Would you tell me please,' said Alice, `what that means?' > > `Now you talk like a reasonable child,' said Humpty Dumpty, looking > > very much pleased. `I meant by "impenetrability" that we've had enough > > of that subject, and it would be just as well if you'd mention what > > you mean to do next, as I suppose you don't mean to stop here all the > > rest of your life.' > > `That's a great deal to make one word mean,' Alice said in a > > thoughtful tone. > > `When I make a word do a lot of work like that,' said Humpty Dumpty, > > `I always pay it extra.' > > `Oh!' said Alice. She was too much puzzled to make any other remark. > > `Ah, you should see 'em come round me of a Saturday night,' Humpty > > Dumpty went on, wagging his head gravely from side to side, `for to > > get their wages, you know.' > > >http://www.sabian.org/Alice/lgchap06.htm > > > Francis > > > On 22 Feb., 16:58, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Words are subjective in nature. Lee, your son will associate that term > > > with the specific experience...place and situation. Others will not. > > > None of us come to any language term with the same set of historical > > > experiences nor understandings. > > > > On Feb 22, 7:25 am, Lee <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Perhaps. Or perhaps as words have more than one definition, they are > > > > using a sligthly skewed one? Or perhaps it is acceptable in debate to > > > > first clarify your definitions? Or perhaps as langauge is changable > > > > such monkeying around with words is normal and also acceptable? Or > > > > just perhaps? > > > > > Heh I really wouldn't like to say. > > > > > On 22 Feb, 15:22, fiddler <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > That is the problem with people like molly and bernstein, people that > > > > > like to change definitions or misapropriate words to fit whatever idea > > > > > they want to propose whether or not the word fits or has a different > > > > > definition. > > > > > > On Feb 22, 6:11 am, [email protected] wrote: > > > > > > > But ifpeople can't describe it so there isome unanamity as to what > > > > > > theexperience is like how does one know it is inturtion they > > > > > > areexperienciing? > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > From: fiddler <[email protected]> > > > > > > To: "Minds Eye" <[email protected]> > > > > > > Sent: Mon, Feb 22, 2010 2:45 am > > > > > > Subject: [Mind's Eye] Re: Intuition > > > > > > > But again, every thinking person understands or has felt intuition. > > > > > > It's much the same concept in the mental arena that breathing is in > > > > > > the physical. No matter how people attempt to re-describe it, the > > > > > > original concept is unchanged. > > > > > > > On Feb 21, 11:07 pm, [email protected] wrote: > > > > > > > Ok its a lousy analogy. How about people who are blind from > > > > > > > birth imagining > > > > > > site. Help me out - you know what I mean> > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > From: fiddler <[email protected]> > > > > > > > To: "Minds Eye" <[email protected]> > > > > > > > Sent: Mon, Feb 22, 2010 1:50 am > > > > > > > Subject: [Mind's Eye] Re: Intuition > > > > > > > > this is shown as untrue throughout history, only slaves that > > > > > > > actively > > > > > > > refuse to contemplate freedom do not contemplate freedom. Just as > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > people that refuse to admit a concept exists do not allow the > > > > > > > concept > > > > > > > credibility. You find this mostly in people that love > > > > > > > dissemination > > > > > > > and those that argue silly points like...well... > > > > > > > > On Feb 21, 10:44 pm, [email protected] wrote: > > > > > > > > Ok you win - I suppose a slave would be numb to the concept of > > > > > > > > freedom if > > > > > > > they never tasted any in their life. > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > From: ornamentalmind <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > To: "Minds Eye" <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > Sent: Mon, Feb 22, 2010 1:39 am > > > > > > > > Subject: [Mind's Eye] Re: Intuition > > > > > > > > > Interesting set of words Gibbs, but prior to my having a > > > > > > > > one-to-one > > > > > > > > correlation between the term ‘intuition’ and the experience > > > > > > > > itself, I > > > > > > > > seriously doubt if you apparent analogy nor comparison > > > > > > > > with/definition > > > > > > > > of, cause effect would have let me know what intuition was… > > > > > > > > > On Feb 21, 10:25 pm, [email protected] wrote: > > > > > > > > > Yes - try this out. It is known that a movie is constructed > > > > > > > > > by putting a > > > > > > > > number of still photo shots side by side and then speeding them > > > > > > > > up to 32 > > > > > > > frames > > > > > > > > per minute - In so doing this will produce an illusion of > > > > > > > > motion in what is > > > > > > > > really single shots. > > > > > > > > > > So too the differentiation between intellect which is > > > > > > > > > perceived as an idea > > > > > > > > which is really a chain of causes and effects. When you speed > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > connections > > > > > > > up > > > > > > > > you blur the connections which is experienced as an immediate > > > > > > > > grasping of > > > > > > > > something significant. The immediacy of cause and effect > > > > > > > > connections blurred > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > experienced as an intuition. > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > From: ornamentalmind <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > To: "Minds Eye" <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > Sent: Mon, Feb 22, 2010 12:36 am > > > > > > > > > Subject: [Mind's Eye] Re: Intuition > > > > > > > > > > Rephrasing it in a way that may better convey my meaning > > > > > > > > > Gibbs: > > > > > > > > > > Are you suggesting that intuition can be known/understood > > > > > > > > > using > > > > > > > > > concepts and words *when the person being told about has never > > > > > > > > > experienced intuition*? > > > > > > > > > > On Feb 21, 4:52 pm, [email protected] wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Are you suggesting that intuition can be known/understood > > > > > > > > > > using > > > > > > > > > > concepts and words? > > > > > > > > > > > ABSOLUTELY! > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > > From: ornamentalmind <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > > To: "Minds Eye" <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > > Sent: Sun, Feb 21, 2010 7:14 pm > > > > > > > > > > Subject: [Mind's Eye] Re: Intuition > > > > > > > > > > > “Yes Ornamental - If intuition cannot be conceptualized or > > > > > > > > > > understood > > > > > > > > > > using concepts then this attempt at shared understanding is > > > > > > > > > > indeed > > > > > > > > > > futile…” – gw > > > > > > > > > > > Are you suggesting that intuition can be known/understood > > > > > > > > > > using > > > > > > > > > > concepts and words? > > > > > > > > > > > “… If our experience of intuition (as both process of > > > > > > > > > > accessing > > > > > > > > > > 'knowledge' as well as the implied subject matter of that > > > > > > > > > > process - > > > > > > > > > > then your experience of it is as valid as mine and vice > > > > > > > > > > versa. So that > > > > > > > > > > if I choose to view it through the prism of experiential > > > > > > > > > > logic (which > > > > > > > > > > I choose to do) you should endorse my perspective…” – gw > > > > > > > > > > > Perhaps I missed the part where you explained what you mean > > > > > > > > > > by > > > > > > > > > > ‘experiential logic’. If so, just direct me to it please. I > > > > > > > > > > couldn’t > > > > > > > > > > find much that appeared reasonable online. > > > > > > > > > > > “… My experience of the color red may or may not be > > > > > > > > > > exactly like your > > > > > > > > > > experience of red and according to you we will never be > > > > > > > > > > able to > > > > > > > > > > know….” – gw > > > > > > > > > > > In many ways, true, we won’t know…unless perhaps some very > > > > > > > > > > strong > > > > > > > > > > empathetical sense was used. This would be a new topic of > > > > > > > > > > course. > > > > > > > > > > > “… Ok - substitute intuition for the red color. Is there a > > > > > > > > > > difference > > > > > > > > > > in perspective…” – gw > > > > > > > > > > > A difference in perspective? In such rarefied topics, > > > > > > > > > > language > > > > > > > > > > matters. I’m not sure exactly what you are asking here. > > > > > > > > > > Guessing, I > > > > > > > > > > will say that the visual ‘sense’ is of a different nature > > > > > > > > > > than that of > > > > > > > > > > ‘intuition’ even though neither are direct results of > > > > > > > > > > concepts and > > > > > > > > > > language. One could add that the auditory sense, the > > > > > > > > > > kinesthetic sense > > > > > > > > > > etc. are all ‘different’ in some ways. On the other hand, > > > > > > > > > > from the > > > > > > > > > > perspective of the unity of all, they are all aspects of > > > > > > > > > > ‘mind’ (not > > > > > > > > > > thinking alone, more along the line of cognition) > > > > > > > > > > > So, while there is sameness…one can, when broken into > > > > > > > > > > constituent > > > > > > > > > > parts, discriminate differences too. > > > > > > > > > > > “…There is also a rather elevated tone that so called > > > > > > > > > > intuitive > > > > > > > > > > knowledge is vastly superior to lets say any of the > > > > > > > > > > remarkable > > > > > > > > > > findings of science…” – gw > > > > > > > > > > > Again, I’m not sure of what you mean by ‘elevated tone’ so > > > > > > > > > > hesitate… > > > > > > > > > > As to superiority let alone being *vastly* superior, they > > > > > > > > > > are of > > > > > > > > > > different scales…different types of stuff…so, such a claim > > > > > > > > > > is nothing > > > > > > > > > > I would posit without a great more discussion and > > ... > > Erfahren Sie mehr » -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en.
