Hi Ron,

On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 8:07 AM, X Acto <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> Mark to Marsha:
> Thanks for your antonym.  I have a better understanding of what you
> are saying.  And, as I understand it, I am in agreement with you.
> Often this reification is used to set up logical traps with the
> opponent so I also agree with your concern of being caged.  In this
> forum there seems to be much "leading the witness" towards some kind
> of Western trap.
>
> Ron:
> Hello Mark,
> I think the message you are supporting is one where we dispose of meaning
> and if we really take a hard look at meaning we find we are often talking 
> about
> value.
> In this way, greater meaning is greater value and if one is leading, they are
> leading
> to this conclusion.

[Mark]
Yes, I agree with the notion of Value.  I do not think I am supporting
the destruction of meaning.  There is certainly rational meaning which
has high value.  It is what we do as humans, can not stop from doing,
and does bring us value.  What I am suggesting is that such value is
not complete, it can never be.  So, it is important to place such
value into  context.  Such contextualization is done through
rationality, but points outside of it.

> Certainly false problems are gumption traps, they lead to a stuckness in
> thought.
> Often these false problems emerge from intellectual assumptions and if
> reification
> is anything it's a bad habit and like any habitual behaviour it is difficult 
> to
> break from.
> It takes a kind of re-assocation of meaning.

[Mark]
Yes, all intellectual endeavors begin with agreed on assumptions.  If
I understand how reification is being used, it does present certain
stopping points in experience.  Such points can indeed become
permanent.  The original thread of "keep on trucking" was in reference
to a phrase used around the time which ZMM was written.  It meant to
keep on moving.  That is, get out of gumption traps.  Meaning can be
re-associated through rational means, but also by pointing outside of
rationality.
>
> Like smoking, not everyone is able to quit or willing to quit or even knows 
> that
> it's bad
> for their health. 40yrs ago smoking was ok, the hazards were invisible. But 
> like
> any
> habit, the key to breaking it is education.

[Mark]
Smoking could be an example of rational argument breaking irrational
gumption traps.  The recent hysteria over smoking could also be
considered a trap of sorts.  Any obsession with a particular is a
trap.  There can be a trap in avoiding all traps (such as destroying
reason), which is not something I am proposing.  I am proposing
looking beyond the rational as an additional facet of experience.
>
> RMP targeted the right area with his 1961 paper on quality in writing the 
> reform
> must begin
>
> by how our youth are educated. Breaking these habits are much easier when they
> are not
> formed or supported to begin with.

[Mark]
Education can have many meanings.  There is education in playing
basketball which is different from math education.  I certainly
support education so long as it is seen for what it is.  Much
education is forceful and coercive.  This is the nefarious side of
eduction.  We spend many years as children in a form of Western
education that is often hard to break out of.  Progression of MoQ seem
to suffer from such education.

I want to end by returning to reification.  In science we use a term
"deconvolution" in terms of signal processing.  I am currently
involved in this, and have been applying it to our current
discussions.  Deconvolution is the process of finding a meaningful
signal in the preponderance of noise.  This is also used in the SETI
program by NASA.  What are used are mathematical techniques such as
Fourier Transforms.  This is similar to what we rational humans do in
terms of making order out of chaos.  Using assumptions such
deconvolution is possible, but the resulting meaningful signal is
dependent on the original assumptions.  If one changes the
assumptions, a different signal can be found.

MoQ, in many ways, challenges assumptions.  That is, it requests we go
back to our original, well imbedded assumptions and challenge them.
By doing so, the reified concept may come out very differently.  This
could be along lines of spiritual rationality.  Education could
therefore be directed at the root cause of possible misconception for
re-conception of the direction we are going.  Such a process can be
messy, and full of devious characters who have an agenda.  I am not
speaking here of those in this forum, but those who wield greater
influence.  Education is not free from those who claim to be leaders.
It is not entirely an organic process.

Cheers,
Mark
>
>
>
> ========================================
> 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

Reply via email to