Quote

Hello John,
The words i used are a hypothesis of mine derived from what Jung says.
He doesn't talk about a dynamic function to multiply symbols, but the
division seems to be performing this task.
It's not easy going. A mind divided against itself can become neurotic,
painful, and all the rest of it. But it's the price that is paid for the
acceleration of symbols.
I think this supports those who find it supports them.
I don't know why i have to tippy toe around like a criminal, but i'm
thinking that if i am tacit i won't fill up my quota.


Comment , Adrie.
i dont know why i have to tippy toe around....etc,

you are blowing your cover , the obsession is taking the lead again Bodrus.;
get medical attention.






2010/9/4 <[email protected]>

>
> Ade,
>
> This reminded me of some reading I'm doing of Peirce's thinking:
>
>
> > Hello ?
> > All humas are symbolic animals.
> > Those which developed a division between their psychic nature and
> > non-psychic nature had a dynamic function to multiply symbols.
> >
> >
> > This process developed in the East also but it lacked the dynamic
> function.
> >
> >
> > So the trouble lies in the dynamic function. That is to say, it isn't a
> > trouble at all.
> >
> >
>  *http://www.cspeirce.com/menu/library/aboutcsp/auspitz/escape.htm
>
> To repeat: Peirce's motive in providing explicitly for the free, forward
> play of mind was to give prominence to hypothesis in scientific discovery.
> Instead of stifling the bold, speculative leap, Peirce wished to find ways
> to encourage and discipline it. He did so out of a faith in the human
> capacity to guess correctly. As he saw it, the progress of science
> testified
> to a reality present in both the human mind and the order of the universe.
> Science did not proceed merely in small inductive increments but in
> imaginative theorizing in which our use of signs in their general aspects
> enabled us to participate in a natural order that was itself evolving
> toward
> greater generality.
>
> Sounds like Quality thinking to me!
>
> John
>
>
> Hello John,
> The words i used are a hypothesis of mine derived from what Jung says.
> He doesn't talk about a dynamic function to multiply symbols, but the
> division seems to be performing this task.
> It's not easy going. A mind divided against itself can become neurotic,
> painful, and all the rest of it. But it's the price that is paid for the
> acceleration of symbols.
> I think this supports those who find it supports them.
> I don't know why i have to tippy toe around like a criminal, but i'm
> thinking that if i am tacit i won't fill up my quota.
>
>
> Maybe we could use the word custard as a symbol for what can't be mentioned
> more than twice daily.
>
>
> I think Jung supports custard and when i realised this i felt better
> because i had real problems with custard until then.
> It's a great feeling when that happens and i hope custard feels good also.
>
>
> Regarding Peirce, i am not very familiar with the precise details of his
> ideas. I've come into contact with them because they are widely used by
> those who write about culture.
> I'll try and read what you've recommended.
> So many recommendations. It's hard to keep up.
>
>
> Hope to continue with this.
> Thank you
> Ade
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 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
>



-- 
parser
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

Reply via email to