Ian, You said it, it has problems percolating here on the forum, a place where like minded inquirers gather. I think it needs a sit-com, something along the lines of python.
________________________________ From: Ian Glendinning <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Wednesday, May 6, 2009 2:03:34 AM Subject: Re: [MD] Patterns s/o or relationship??? Ron, Spot on, couldn't have distilled that down any better. The linguistic problem can't be fixed (by language). We just have to get over it. Get out from under that "linguistic turn" - be wary of the fact that "natural" language IS a SOMist model of the actual world - but just get on with it. That percolation ... from enlightened physicists (and philosophers and artists) to widespread cultural "understanding" ... is something I found David Deutsch has some interesting things to say. I'll dig up a quote, but he points out that physicists who really do understand, express and use the understanding of that physical emptiness in their day job, still live and communicate their social and domestic lives in the conventional SOMist world. What chance for anyone who doesn't get it ? This memeplex is going to take a lot of shifting. True Kynics maybe. Ian On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 7:43 PM, X Acto <[email protected]> wrote: > Platt, Marsha, > Basically that is what she is saying only she uses the term relationship > which is commonly understood as interaction between objects, but, she > already states that what we assume as objects are actually greater sets > of relationships, relationships of relationships or a better word for what > she is describing is value. > > As I keep hammering on, common assumptions about common terms > in our culture is what creates philosophical paradox , the failure > of rationalism. Our language is based on the grammatic predication > of subjects and objects. So even when we hear the term relationships > we automatically conceptualize the interaction of objects and have difficulty > even forming concepts about entityless abstractions. The same goes for value, > The terms "value" and "relationship" are almost meaningless without > the conventional conception of objects. > Physicists have understood the inherent emptiness of reality for the past > 60-70 yrs but has yet to percolate to the public. > This is why SOL is redundant and obsolete, as MoQists > we already know this, physicists already know this. > Pirsig uses the lingual distinction of Dq/Sq just to avoid > essentialism in conception. > > -Ron > > > > > > ________________________________ > From: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Tuesday, May 5, 2009 7:16:19 AM > Subject: Re: [MD] Patterns s/o or relationship??? > > On 5 May 2009 at 6:56, MarshaV wrote: > >> >> Are all physicist as enlightened as this one??? >> >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRduOpj1R7c&feature=related >> >> >> 4:05 minutes > > Marsha, > > Don't you think this physicist would be more enlightened if she had > acknowledged the role of values in the structure of the universe? > Emphasizing relationships and interconnections as she does strikes me as > assuming an S/O premise. > > Thanks for the link. > > Platt > > 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/ > 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/
