At 02:13 PM 9/20/2008, you wrote:
Marsha,
Not sure I agree with your phenomenal / conceptual split, but I would
say all ontology is conceptual anyway.
Ian
Hi Ian,
Yes, that is what I am saying, it is all conceptual. All patterns
are conceptual. I wasn't sure if the phrase 'ontological identity'
was proper. As I understand it 'ontological identity' would be 'its
nature', or the nature of all patterns. But I still wasn't sure if
I was using the word correctly.
I'm using the word phenomenal to say that inorganic and biological
patterns referent is external and initially experienced through the
five senses regardless of the fact that it is a conceptual
pattern. Does that make sense?
It seems to me that social and intellectual patterns would be
conceptual all the way through. Patterns whose referent has only
been conceptual.
Just wondering what others think? Dancing is biological, yes? If a
person is dancing alone it is biological. If two people or more are
dancing it has a social aspect.
I have way too many questions.
Thanks for responding.
Marsha
On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 3:26 AM, MarshaV <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Question:
>
> Would you say that the ontological identity of patterns(all spovs) is
> conceptual? That would be regardless whether they were related to
> phenomenon (inorganic & biological) or purely conceptual (social &
> intellectual).
>
> I'm just trying to think this through, and I'd love to know what
you think.
>
>
> Marsha
.
.
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/
