At 10:41 AM 9/12/2008, you wrote:
[Marsha]
You've never seen me walk. What can you say about how I walk?
[Arlo]
I'm basing this on what I see here. What else could I base it on? You are
saying on one hand you believe selves are fictions, then on the other you are
saying "selves" should be "honest" about things. You can't have it both ways.
Either the "self" is a fiction, and you accept it as such, or their are "real
things" about it.
To me a self is not one and not many. Self is a process. Being
honest is also a process.
[Marsha]
Okay, but I think I should leave your honesty open for further verification.
[Arlo]
Anytime you can point out where I've been dishonest, please feel
free to do so.
I don't think I need to point it out. At the moment I'm in the
process of being suspicious. And I have explained to you why. What
would be the odds of such a coincidence?
[Marsha]
If I cannot see you because were using email, and you tell me you're blue, but
you're really orange, you are being dishonest.
[Arlo]
What if I believe I am orange, but trapped in a blue body? Which is more
important? Honesty to how one feels? Or honesty to some
physiological form? Why
is one even related to the other?
Orange and blue are colors dependent on eyes, seeing and a visual
object. How one feels is something else. One could easily say "I'm
the color blue, but feeling orange?" That would be the process of
being honest.
[Marsha]
But maybe I am planning on buying you a pretty dress to match your
color, so it
does matter.
[Arlo]
In this context, physiological form does have value. Until then,
whatever color
I am is whatever color you accept me to be. But whatever color dress
you end up
buying my physiological form has no bearing, or should have no bearing, on the
nature of the identity you interact with here. This is why I said to you, the
"Marsha" that I know and has value to me and that I accept as a "woman" will
continue to exist as such to me even if I found out your
physiological form had
male parts.
Whatever...
[Marsha]
This is a culture/language issue and you know it.
[Arlo]
Absolutely. From day one I've said that these things we are talking about,
continuity across time and continuity across contexts, are cultural-social
patterns of value.
Yes, they are patterns. So was thinking the world was flat a
cultural pattern. I don't know how many average people would
actually agree with what you described. I think it is far too
abstract. Either way 'continuity across time' and 'continuity across
context' is illusion. Cultural glasses.
They have real meaning for us socially, and so we mostly
willingly adopt them (I keep the same name) and sometimes enforce them with
electro-shock (as what happened to the "old Bob").
What? If you are talking about 'continuity across time' and
'continuity across context', very few would be aware of these
patterns. Nobody knowingly adopts them as cultural patterns. Get
with the program. You may be at the University too long.
[Marsha]
Both are structured for a self that is independent with a body and mind, and a
gender association.
[Arlo]
I disagree. I think our cultural contexts are structured for a self that is
wholly dependent on "body" and a singular gender association. "One body, one
mind, one soul" as it were.
Let me first restate to a more exact meaning: Culture and language
are structured for a self that is independent with a body and mind,
and a gender association. Okay, add soul. "One body, one mind and
one soul", yet thought to be one independent agent.
[Marsha]
I admit I'm having trouble trying to explain myself. But I think you are
sounding very strange yourself. You think all this talk about avatars, faces,
fictions corporeal hosts and sex-change operations is crystal clear? It is
not clear to me.
[Arlo]
I've never claimed I present my thoughts clearly. If I did, I'd never have to
write a second post.
This is work.
[Marsha]
Honesty about being orange rather than blue.
[Arlo]
Both are fictions. To base one's "realness" on physiology is a mistake. The
color I am is the color I present and you accept. There is no other reality
behind that. The pigment of my skin has nothing whatsoever to do
with the color
of my self. You either accept "Arlo" as orange or you do not. But if
he says he
is, and you point the blue pigment of his skin as evidence of dishonesty, you
are tying identity to body, a mistake in my opinion.
I do not know how you got to this place, and where "realness" came
from. I'm defending 'wanting honesty in communication'. This last
paragraph makes absolutely no sense to the flow of the
conversation. I see the words orange, blue and physiology, but rest
seem to have arrived from one of Jupiter's moons.
"Marsha" is a woman...
[Chorus:]
I'm a bitch, I'm a lover
I'm a child, I'm a mother
I'm a sinner, I'm a saint
I do not feel ashamed
I'm your hell, I'm your dream
I'm nothing in between
You know you wouldn't want it any other way
.
.
Shoot for the moon. Even if you miss, you'll land among the stars.........
.
.
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/
