Ron prev:
That it becomes a subconscious assumption of experience itself Because
we
have built a substantial repertoire that ties these Assumptions to it.

When you stop to think of the layer upon layer of preconceptions, That
intellectualization is built on...

[Krimel]
Well sure we have lots of preconceptions and language shapes lots of
them.
But the shape is also determined by our emotional responses to the
language
structures and much of the meaning we get is imparted by tone of voice.
Layer upon layer indeed but not all the layers are linguistic.

Ron:
That was my meaning, I tend to want to leave the door open to thought
Simply for the reason that intellect is relatively new to the
socio-biological scene. This is what I meant by layers of influence it
All can amount to an in-accurate perception. Just like the Mandelbrot
set,
One variable can alter the structure dramatically. A false bad feeling
can manifest in intellectually poor choices and conceptions all stemming
>From an iron deficiency or some chemical abnormality.

That all is an interrelated system is obvious, this is why I specified
Intellectual thought, because this is the focus of the S/O debate
And the focus of my assertion that the majority of philosophical
Thought about the mind/matter problem is about the grammatical rules
Of governing comprehensive logical meaning a.k.a intellect. How
We parse up experience in understandable terms. Thoughts are
Thoughts are thoughts, that much we can drop for the moment,
It's when we do what we are doing NOW, intellectualizing,
That it becomes a relevant observation. That's what I'm concerned
With. The mind/matter paradox is a intellectual paradox, it
Really does not exist.  s/o aggregate - grammar. self/other
-grammar. I suspect a few folks here to call this absurd
For it dashes everything. The house of mirrors comes down
And all we are left with is the immediate now.



Ron:
The fact that anyone understands the MoQ at all is a miracle.

[Krimel]
My incarnations have only been hanging out here for a mere three years
but
we haven't seen anything to indicate that anyone but us understands the
MoQ
;->

Ron:
And THAT is touch and go.



[Arlo]
Did you ever have a thought that was not verbal? Describe this as 
best you can. How did you know what you were thinking? Now, as I 
said, I certainly grant there are pre-intellectual, pre-verbal 
experiences, call them aesthetic experiences if you wish, but these 
are not "thoughts". They lead to all kinds of thoughts, to be sure.

[Krimel]

I can quote you verbatim passages from ZMM but I can not express to you
the
sensations they originally evoked in me swinging in a Mayan hammock on a
screened in porch in 1975 with a pack of Marlboro Reds and a six pack of
Bud
at the ready. What ever images all that may evoke for you it is not what
I
felt. Whatever words I select to share my experience aren't pulled from
sheets of paper in a mental file drawer. They arise from a lame attempt
to
reconstruct a long ago experience as it was experienced. The experience
shapes the verbal structure I construct not the other way around.

Ron:
All those memories of experience were first created by previous
memories,
Simplified and exaggerated, all of them shaped by understanding all of
the
Objects and smells and feelings connected in memory and understanding
Since your first weeks alive when your mother associated her patterns
With the word "Mommy".



[Krimel]
Note to Ham: we were at least on the same team for a while until you
started
that ontology gibberish. This is hard enough, save it for another time. 

Your original statement was much more on target, "Thoughts are
intellectualized as concepts, not dictated by grammar.  Putting thoughts
into words to communicate the concept comes later, if at all.  If we're
only
analyzing verbal propositions, we're not conceptualizing."



Ron:
The simple fact of the matter is that the origin of thought has no
bearing
On what I'm trying to discuss, the fact is we are immersed in language
>From the moment we are born as it stands right now. It's rules shape
How we conceptualize intellectually thus it influences the perception
Of experiences.

We visualize within the realm of understanding. Understanding is formed
>From logical rules of meaning.





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/

Reply via email to