On Jun 19, 2013, at 5:35 PM, Paul Turner <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Marsha, again, > > Rather than think of a word, concept or static pattern as a fixed, >> dictionary definition, or "the one best", I see a word, concept or static >> pattern as the accumulation of all usage (value)? Can you see this in the >> spirit as it is presented, rather than some absolute, amoral, cultural >> relativism, nihilism or an example of being an anti-intellectual? > > Yes, I said previously that as long as you (at least try to) explain the > way you are using words you need not stick to dictionary definitions. This was not a defensive move; it was a statement of my value. Rather than think of a word, concept or static pattern as a fixed, dictionary definition, or "the one best", I see a word, concept or static pattern as the accumulation of all its usage (value)? > But you can't just say, for example "Well that's not how I use a word > so you've got it wrong" and leave it at that. Well you can but it kind > of kills the conversation. I don't think I do that. When one sees it's turtles all the down, it is quite difficult to cling to what is right, wrong, or true. > I'm not sure how this relates to cultural relativism and nihilism exactly? > I guess it relates to an assumption that no set of words are better than > any others? I have never thought that it was the case that some patterns are not better than others. To say that would be to deny value. > While the pattern loses authority, it gains in creativity. This view lends >> itself to a flexibility in application and function that is more in tuned >> with the dynamic experience of the present. Is this all that can be said? >> No, it represents merely what has come off the top of my head. It's that >> dynamic present that will, for some, open to the creative new. > > Well I think that to enable communication and intellectual progression > there needs to be a balance between sticking rigidly to dictionary meanings > and persistently novel usage, between static latching and Dynamic > innovation, between platitude and jabberwocky. Thinking of a pattern as an accumulation of all usage does not translate into jabberwocky. It would most certainly even include the dictionary definition. Why must it always come down to some abstracted either/or - Yes or no? Black or white? Right or wrong? True or false? 0 or 1? A or not-A? - position? It doesn't for me. Marsha 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
