[Krimel]
Just a technical point but the Mandelbrot set never changes. We see
difference parts of it based on the number we seed into it but the set
itself, though infinite is constant.

Ron:
In the fractal generator I have, you can play with the variables to
Create Different patterns, the Mandelbrot set, as you say is a particular
algorithm, Julian sets are interesting, some formulas are more complex 
than others You can change the variables and change the pattern infinitely.
Connect different sets and the way they feed into one another and you
Get Very complex patterns. But changing one variable, changes the entire
pattern.

[Krimel]
You are correct sir I suspect God uses a program like that to makes trees
and broccoli and galaxies. I know Lucas did to make a galaxies a long time
ago and far way...

Ron:
Well, you can reduce any concept to component atoms and lose the
meaning.
That's why I like to keep it to what it refers to, intellection. I limit
It T0 the English language, reduction therefore, like Pirsig did, comes
Down To taxonomic classification of experience. Nouns to be exact.

[Krimel]
You can certainly decide to look at only linguistic thinking but that is
different that what Arlo is talking about when he says that all thinking is
linguistic. I happen to be more interested in what semiotics is about than
about what purely verbal thought is all about.

Ron:
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.

[Krimel]
Ok but I still don't think self/other arises out of grammar. It certainly
gets expressed in words but children learn to distinguish self from not self
without words. The immune system does as well.

I don't dispute that the structure of thought and the structure of grammar
are related but which way does the relationship run? Linguistics is a very
complex subject. I believe Arlo has some special expertise in it. I know
very little but enough to know that some like Chomsky hold that there is an
innate transformational grammar built into humans genetically. Others have
claimed that language is entirely learned and acquired through experience.
We know for example that totally different structures in the brain handle
different aspects of language at least one for speaking and one for
understanding. Some say language involves a cluster of abilities that
co-evolved separately in our species. Others say it is a single ability that
evolved and the rest is just fortuitous side effects.

In fact from nature vs nurture to "see and say" vs "hooked on phonics" I
suspect there is nothing you could say about language that wouldn't have
half the people in the room wanting to make you king and the other half
wanting to take your head. 

[Krimel earlier]
I get what you are saying but I see it differently. From the individual
perspective only MY mind exists phenomenologically. All that exists for
me is the result of neurological impulses. But to the extent that I
experience you and share experiences in common with you, all that exists 
is matter, that is a set of constant relationships and patterns that you 
and I agree upon. 

The paradox is that experience is totally mind but what exists is
Totally matter. Now I personally believe that my mind and 
neurological states arise from that external world of patterns 
and relationships and that the seeming duality does not exist. I 
frankly admit there is faith involve. I think it is more of a skip 
of faith than a leap of faith. But this is drifting way off topic.

Ron:
No, this is directly on topic as a matter of fact, experience is what it
is. Only when, like you do above, intellectualize and make the distinction
between certain kinds of experiences does mind and matter emerge.
All that really exists is experience. Nothing more. 
I experience therefore I am. I can empirically verify this at any
moment. No hop skip or leap of faith at all, For there is no gap 
between concept and experience. Its all on experience directly , now. 
Look at what Pirsig is saying in this light and a lot of pieces begin 
to fall into place.

[Krimel]
I am with you up to a point. All that exists for me is my experience. That
is all I can really talk about with certainty. I am certain that I have
experience but not what it is or where it comes from. I could be a Hindu God
playing the Lila game. I could be a coppertop in the Matrix. I could just be
over complicating the whole business and all is exactly as it seems.
Nevertheless, once we move past the simple fact of our own experience of
existence the next step is a hop, skip or a jump.




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