[Arlo]
So this is beating a dead horse a bit, and I've lost the reason we 
are even arguing this out, and cluttering SA's tiny skull, and if 
semiosis is your word of choice, then semiosis it is. But you won't 
get me to agree that unconscious, non-symbolic neural activity is 
"thought" any more than I can apparently get you to agree that it's not.

So, endgame?

[Krimel]
Slow down there Hoss! There is a big misunderstanding and not doubt I am
responsible for a big chunk of it so let's review. Somewhere early on it was
stated that language determines the structure of thought. Ham for his own
reasons said he didn't think so and I for my own said the same. My chief
reason is that fairly recently I began to develop an appreciation and
curiosity about Paul Eckman's research and findings that emotions are what
appear to be a kind of universal language. Both their expression and the
recognition of them appear to be cross cultural and even to some extent
cross species. I really don't know what to make of it but it raises a lot of
questions. It would appear to be and example of objective communication
without symbolic mediation. I find this surprising and intriguing. I think
they are interesting questions so I have been asking you.

I am not trying to convince you of much of anything since I have no
convictions only leanings and questions about this. If I seem to be pressing
you, it is because I either don't understand your answers or don't think
they really answer the questions raised. I am interested in your perspective
on this because you seem to have a good grip on this very complex subject.
When I ask about the distinction between analog and digital memory,
representation versus reproduction I am not being rhetorical or smart assed
I am curious. This issue of how semioticians regard classical conditioning
for example. What is the crux of the dispute? I'm not taking sides. I can
see an argument both ways. If it does not include classical conditioning or
emotions how does one get to zoosemiotics and apply any of this to animals
who either do not seem to have symbolic conceptions or if they do we can't
access them? How does semiotics relate to information theory?

Endgame? You could tell me to get off my lazy butt and read for myself. That
would be fair. I am just usually heading in six directions at once in
multiple modalities and this is one of them. It will be a while before I can
read Pierce or any of those guys so lazy would be about right...

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