On 2/26/10 12:53 PM, "ARLO J BENSINGER JR" <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Arlo, I was trying to use precise language which I find necessary in conflicting metaphysics like SOM and MOQ. I wasn't trying to be obscure or literal/metaphorical. Imho for precision I try to use a distinction between perception (analogy/metaphor) and conception (Webster's dictionary). Joe > [Joseph] I question your use of ³the indefinable Void² with DQ in > parenthesis. ³Indefinable² and ³void² do not have the same meaning. > [Arlo] The indefinable is what creates the Void in symbolic representations. > I'm not talking about a big, black hole in space. If the term troubles you, > drop it, "The code of art, or just "art", is IMO that which allows us to catch > a fleeting glance of the indefinable (DQ)." [Joseph] Rather than creating a > greater emphasis for a meaning for DQ, when placed together they are > ³nonsense² . [Arlo] I don't think so. I think it creates a very salient > metaphor. Like the "void" in Magritte's "False Mirror". [Jospeh] By > definition there is nothing in a void. [Arlo] Alright, I'm not gonna get into > a big literal/metaphorical argument here. As I said, I wasn't referring to a > vacant area of space, but to the everpresent "Void" in the semantic web of our > symbolically-mediated activity; that which symbols can only point to, but > never capture. [Joseph] Imho DQ as evolution is not nonsense. [Arlo] ?? Um. > Okay. No one said it was. Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing > etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: h > ttp://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/p > ipermail/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/
