Hi DM, As you know I've been known to say "everything is metaphor" before now, so again I couldn't argue.
Though having said that Barfield appears to dismiss "metaphor" as too simple a relationship between the "inner and outer worlds" - trying to reconcile that at the moment - but I think he's reacting to a much narrower definition of metaphor than you or I would. Regards Ian On 5/14/08, David M <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Ian > > > Yes the core of any metaphysics is axiomatic, and any choice of > > direction of ontological splitting, is just that a "deemed" choice. > > > > DM: Yes, I'd add analogy and metaphor as also key to metaphysics > and ontology. > > > There cannot be any fundamental / defintive statement of why any one > > choice is better ... other than it works for as much of the > > experienced world as possible with minimum inconsistency and maximum > > completeness - of course nothing can be entirely complete AND > > consistent - so yet more choice about what is "best". Do we really > > need anyone to tell us these things ? Bo can't because no-one can, > > no-one should be expected to. > > > > DM: Agreed. > > > > > 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/
