Yes, John, Intention is the connection. This can also be found in Toltec spirituality. While I do not care much for M.A. Ruiz, he does have some interesting things to say.
In terms of Quality: So we go back to the period when there was no SOM, the moment of birth. All we are is Intent (or Will). That is direct, full Quality. Then we grow and adapt, we are taught the social part, we learn language. While intention is still there it becomes simplified by communication. Individual consciousness is born through that mirror. We accept thinking in words because we prepare ourselves to communicate with others, which is the reflection of our own selves. We no longer play in wonder. Quality becomes a relationship between: the social level, not the subjective. But it is not grander, just different, and perhaps much simpler. That process of simplification is called intellect, which then relies on science and logic which is only a small part of the experience, but we are bewitched by it because of communication, the social dominates the personal. And so, what of the original intention? These days we say it is survival, as if that explains everything. So we are born to survive, nice, but a little backwards. We survive because we are born seems more likely. And so, what of the original intention? Can it be found in Religion, in Scientism, in Metaphysics? Perhaps we still are the original intention, it just seems so damn boring sometimes. And the loss of novelty comes from memory. We live in that memory, like living in the tail of a comet, not in its leading front. We get caught in the frozen debris which is but the spent comet, looking backwards and trying to divine what lays ahead. And we wonder where is Quality? Just turn around, it is right in front. Clean those doors of perception. And that, is complete undiluted empiricism. Cheers, Mark On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 4:21 PM, John Carl <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks, dave, most interesting, but if you ask me, this guy (Sausseurre) > leaves out the most important part of the picture: > > > > > It is important to note that, according to Saussure, the sign is > > completely arbitrary, i.e. there was no necessary connection between the > > sign and its meaning. > > > The necessary connection missing is the intention of the signifier, > engaged > in a process which is meant to engage the perceived other. Surely, this > is > a real thing - most of what we deem "Quality" writing are those signs that > communicate most effectively - that is, make that intended connection, > connect with the perception of other. > > > > > This sets him apart from previous philosophers such as Plato or the > > Scholastics, who thought that there must be some connection between a > > signifier and the object it signifies. > > > And there is. It's called "The Quality Connection". > > > Saussure believed that dismantling signs was a real science, for in doing > so > > we come to an empirical understanding of how humans synthesize physical > > stimuli into words and other abstract concepts." > > > > > Well now, there, I agree completely. > > Thanks for the instructive verbiage, perfessor. mucho appreciated. > > existentially yours, > > John > 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
