Dave, If you read 'reifying carrots' thread, most of my examples of reification come from a Buddhist perspective. I think this is quite appropriate when one considers the MoQ may be considered a bridge between Western Science and Eastern Insight.
Wikipedia is not the sole source of information. There are also many books available, and I read. Marsha On Sep 19, 2010, at 10:46 AM, David Thomas wrote: > On 9/18/10 11:57 PM, "MarshaV" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Reification is represents my reasoning for labeling intellectual static >> patterns of value a product of subject/object thinking. The 'reifying >> carrots' thread I have presented many examples, primarily Buddhist, but also >> others, explaining the process. Here is one such example: > > In linguistics > Main article: Abstraction (linguistics) > Reification, also called hypostatization, might be considered a formal > fallacy whenever an abstract concept, such as "society" or "technology" is > treated as if it were a concrete object. In linguistics this is called > metonymy, in which abstract concepts are referred to using the same sorts of > nouns that signify concrete objects. Metonymy is an aspect of the English > language and of other languages. It can blur the distinction between > abstract and concrete things: > 1805: Horatio Nelson (Battle of Trafalgar) - "England expects that every man > will do his duty" > [wikipedia] > > I guess basing one's general understanding of reality on a formal fallacy > does have a certain boldness about it. > > Dave > > > 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
