> >[Marsha] > >My meaning is that a thing does not inherently exist. A thing exist > >based on convention. > > > >[Krimel] > >So what does "exist" or have inherent existence? > >[Marsha] >No thing inherently exists. No thing exists from its own >side. There is no thing-in-itself. No thing has its own essence or >nature, etc. > >Entities exist by convention and are best represented as patterns, >ever-changing, interrelated, mutually dependent static patterns of value, > >[Krimel] >So for you, unless the cheese stands alone its existence is insignificant?
Marsha No, spovs are not insignificant, but they are also not TiTs. [Krimel] TiTs are not TiTs because they have some form of existence independent of every other TiT. They are TiTs because whatever existence they have is independent of the perceiver. The idea of TiTs at least as Pirsig presents it in ZMM is a pretty mystical notion. 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/
