On Saturday, 12/12/09 6:20 PM, "Joseph Maurer" <[email protected]> wrote:



Following the logic in mathematics 1 exists and the denial of 1 is 0.
Logic requires definition.  What about poetry?

I cannot define myself, and I know I exist.  Not everything I know
is definable.  Movement does not rely on a definition for existence.
The act of a being that can with the emphasis on can.  Movement
depends on what you are looking at.

I disagree that "not everything [you] know is definable". Empirical knowledge is by definition definable. If existence is the relational system in which objects are perceived to evolve in time and space, does this not define movement and change? Doesn't the subjective awareness that apprehends your being in the world define "your self"? Likewise, what you don't know can be defined as that about which you are ignorant or not informed.

If I have no experience of a thing I have nothing to gain by it, etc.

That is the pragmatists's excuse for ignorance. It assumes that only the principles and processes you can experience are practical, that the search for wisdom is meaningless, and that it's "useless" to learn anything new. If philosophy and science had adopted that credo, we would still be warding off predators from our dark caves.

Logical games depend on essence.

Assuming I am playing a "logical game", what does that statement mean?.

What I say goes and that is the way the game is played!
If I put my faith in another¹s words we have to be speaking a
common language, or I have some experience with his words.
The assertion that there is something in experience that will
always be undefined makes sense!

Are you saying it's impossible for you to understand or appreciate a theoretical concept like DQ or Essence simply because you can't experience it? Or are you implying that what can't be experienced is not worth conceptualizing? If that's what you mean, why are you participating in a philosophy forum?

When I look at the words for definition it seems the first
question asked is what are they defining? If I have no prior
experience with what is being defined I will not understand
the definition.  A definition puts into words what I am curious
about and gives it a format beyond my knowledge of it.  My
desire to know more is that my experience is undefined.
In SOM my experience is indefinable.  In MOQ it is the
level of evolution that becomes indefinable, but I know
that not all things are the same.  If I were to have no
knowledge of the object at all a definition is like a foreign
language unknown to me.  It is the undefined, yet experienced
that prompts a definition so we experience the undefined.
Existence is not going to help.

If I understand you correctly, you are interested only in defining your experience. Is what you're looking for a psychological definition or a neuro-physiological definition? It certainly can't be a philosophical or a metaphysical definition.

A definition merely objectifies what I already have a sense of
what I want to make more objective.  If I know nothing about
what I am defining an objective word is not going to change
my subjective understanding.  Oh! A dictionary is a book on
metaphysics.  Metaphysics does not provide answers!
The logic of physics is not totally capable of answering all questions.
I know what that means. 2.  What just happened is unbelievable?
I am much more concerned about #2.  I may be killed, or I may
be the happiest man alive.

As with all knowledge about what I am doing I use analogies
and metaphors to describe emotional experiences not literal words.
Words are important is SOL yet L remains indefinable.  Aristotle
and Aquinas in their theory of knowledge by abstraction appealed
to the presence of mind and will faculties of a soul for their theory
of knowledge.  After writing beautiful words set to beautiful music
Aquinas denigrated his Summa Theologica to the value of straw.
Not much food there.

Words are always defined unless they aren¹t.  Yet analogies and
metaphors are necessary for the descriptions of my quality of life.
I am a pig!  Metaphor correctly that some words carry meaning
while remaining undefined. Have you never been at a loss for words?
Or cursed! In a tight situation, and you were understood?  You
may claim that philosophy is not about such things but pragmatism
examines all experience.  DQ the indefinable experience, SQ
definable experience are two unequal horns in existence.

Joe, maybe it's the late hour, but I have no idea what triggered all this cynicism, even if it's directed at me. I can accept criticism, but can't respond intelligently to this collage of unclarified assertions. Perhaps you should take a refresher to relieve your frustration, and come back when you can state your point more clearly.

Cheers,
Ham


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/

Reply via email to