Ron adds:
> Form is function may be argued regarding meaning
>
> It all comes down to meaning
>
John:
And meaning comes down to the art of interpretation. Interpretation can
only occur with desire. If I want to use a chair as a table, then it is the
desire which defines my experience.
Ron:
Yet to explain that desire we must agree to the meaning of the terms "chair"
and "table". If we do not agree to the meaning of the terms how may the desire
be explained? it can't . Which is what the dispute seems to be about.
Poor interpretations are usually indicitive of low quality explanations
It is the quality of explanation that is the topic of the conversation about
meaning.
Sure shit may be interpreted as shinola, your ass as a hole in the ground
ect,, ect.. It's called a psychosis when it becomes extreme.
Humans exist in societies, one human is no human.
Meaning within a social context is a higher form of evolution
it is better than individual meaning.
John:
I keep going back in my mind to an essay of my daughter's and then one of
mine on the value of a chair. I definitely agree with
Jan Anders, - Flat chair, no good. I mean, who would possibly desire such a
thing?
Ron:
A parapalegic perhaps, but thats the point what gives the term meaning is it's
use,
the reason we desire it.
Wasn't sure anyone was reading any of this, thanks for the reply to my post.
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
