Greetings Krimel, Just for the record, is a pattern a definition, or compilation of definitions, or something else?
Marsha On Aug 3, 2010, at 8:57 AM, Krimel wrote: >> [Mary] had said: >> The problem is not with the word 'static'. The problem is with the >> word 'concepts'. The levels are not 'concepts'. > > [Krimel] >> All words are concepts. Seriously, until you get this, you are just >> pissing in the wind. > > [Bo] > Mary, does not deny the fact that words are concepts, she just says > that the levels aren't concepts. I.e. that DMB's Jamesian "Dynamic > Flux/Concepts" doesn't correspond to MOQ's "Dynamic/Static". > > [Krimel] > Not only is level a concept it is a concept that aids us in organizing other > concepts. It is a structural component of a conceptual schema. James breaks > it down into percepts and concepts. I agree with that. I also thing this > maps pretty well onto the static/dynamic split. Dave for unspecified reasons > resists equating dynamic flux with perception but he has been slowly moving > in the right direction just give him some more time. > > [Bo] > Language is the sea we swim in and cannot be used as any > metaphysical basics. > > [Krimel] > This is just a catch phrase for you. The fact that we are immersed in > language does not mean we can just ignore that fact; nor does it prevent us > from using language in philosophy and metaphysics. Neither would be possible > without language. In fact philosophy and metaphysics are just those parts of > the intellectual level which allow us to inquire into the nature and meaning > of language and into the nature and meaning of "nature" and "meaning." > Recursion, you see? That's' the meaning of "meta", BTW. > > [Bo] > The same goes for "human beings". We can postulate a time before language > and a time before Homo Sapiens... > > [Krimel] > For that we can also look at the social and communicative behaviors of our > nearest relatives. > > [Bo] > ...but not as a basic divide like DMB's "Everything not language/Language" > or SOM's "Everything not subjective/Subjective". > > [Krimel] > At least you are starting to see that there are lots of ways to carve up > metaphysical space. > > [Bo] > All such ends in paradoxes: All is conveyed by language, the objective > is contained in the subject. > > [Krimel] > Recursion, reflection and feedback loops are not paradoxical. > > > > 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/md/archives.html ___ 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/md/archives.html
