Arlo: > Semiosis is, of course, a better term, since we > "read" symbols like "a red > sunset" in particular culturally adopted ways, but > underlying this is that you > had to have learned HOW to read that particular > sign, and our culture in nigh > ubiquitous in using words to impart this knowledge.
SA: Ok. What's a word? What's semiosis? Either I find this strain of the mind to learn these basic points, pointless in the end, or maybe knowing the difference will get us somewhere? I don't know. If semiosis accounts for all symbols, whether they are words, numbers, paintings, etc..., then couldn't we start from here and then move on to what Ron was trying to say? We moved so far off point, it seems, just to prove points on details, but wasn't Ron's point that we come at the moq from different language contexts? Let's focus on this, and move on, don't ya think? Ron: Yes sir, what I was trying to stress was how languages Treat nouns. I noticed how Pirsig, by using DQ/SQ To described the abstract/concrete distinction is very Similar to how eastern languages treat and describe nouns, as passive/Active. We make these distinctions unconsciously, every time We form a sentence. This also stands to reason, how Arlo was expressing, that words evoke conceptual understanding. We understand intellectually by the words we use and how We use them. We understand, without anyone telling us what class a noun is in. If my wife told me she lost her happiness, I would not start searching The house for it, but if she lost her key, I would. Happiness and key are both nouns, but why would I look for one And not the other? Because key is concrete and happiness is abstract. Key is objective and happiness is subjective. What about the noun Chair? It may be both concrete and abstract, depending on it's use In a sentence. Consequently it shapes how we conceptualize the word chair As an objective, concrete, static or an abstract, subjective, dynamic. One is something you sit on the other is a position held. Just one example of how grammar dictates understanding and meaning. I could give examples all day and people still would say that my Position was extreme and absurd but can't give any reasons WHY. It's in the SODV paper, science is limited by what you can say about Observable phenomena. It is limited by how our language identifies and classifies experience. This is why I say, in many ways Bo is correct When he states that SOM is intellect. Intellect is how we parse up Experience whether it be s/o, passive/active, self/other, male/female Grammatically. The thoughts/language debate is beside the point, we can posit that thoughts Exist independent of intellectualization without any consequence to my Hypothesis for the point is on the focus of intellect. Which is built And dictated by language symbiotically , Arlo has made that argument very well if you ask me. If intellect is suspended in language then it is only reasonable to asses That intellectual thought must obey the very same rules of grammar. Trying to get everyone to understand this here is tough, people Love their own brand of tea! They are comfortable swishing it, it Comforts them and gives them a base for the same old discussions Which they are content to rehash with rehearsed relish. Your Right SA, people have too much invested in their own Views to change, they have been looking at the problem as if it existed in reality for so long that to think otherwise is insane! To suggest that the s/o distinction lies in the mere classification Of nouns is ludicrous! ________________________________________________________________________ ____________ Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ 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/
