What do you mean by creatures? All creatures are dependent, hence there can be no "on their own".
If a thought is seen from the frame of reference of other thoughts, for example asking a question such as "which thought gave rise to me drinking coffee today?", it must be said that the individual thought "how about some coffee?" gave rise to it, not any other thought, say "I like horses", at least not directly. But if you speak from the perspective of a human being, it's odd to think of a thought being a creature on its own. Would you think of your thumb being a creature on its own? But then with reference to the other thumb, you would have to admit its independence. Let's not forget that thoughts, at least within the framework of the MoQ, are *patterns*. Patterns are based on discernible similarities and differences in computation, not information. Nothing can really exist by itself. Akshay 2008/2/23 Heather Perella <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Ron, > > Here's the second question. Do you think 'thoughts' > are their own creatures to an extent? > > > SA > > > > > ____________________________________________________________________________________ > Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page. > http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs > Moq_Discuss mailing list > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org > Archives: > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ > http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/ > Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
