On May 11, 2011, at 1:22 PM, Arlo Bensinger wrote: > > [Marsha] > Have you lost sight of our language being all about the a subject and a verb > acting on a direct or indirect object? > > [Arlo] > Language is the symbolic encoding of experience, the mutual sharing of > experience. The specific structures it takes of course reveal constraints, > but it has also greatly enriched human agency.
[Marsha] How do you know that the structure of our language has greatly enriched human agency? Did you use active imagination? Projection? Because you thunk it? > [Marsha] > I have not spoken of becoming brain dead, just not elevating language when it > is much of the problem. > > [Arlo] > I am not "elevating" it either, as I said it is not about glorifying or > condemn language (or any "structure"), but to see that you can't have the > expanded potential structure brings without constraints. These are not > opposed forces, language enriches and constrains, and the durability of > language historically demonstrates quite clearly that the value it brings > outweighs the constraints it places upon us. [Marsha] >From where I started this morning: We can think and characterize reality only >subject to language, which is conventional (sq) and says nothing that is >ultimately true. Language occludes the way things really are. ___ 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
