[Case] I think I side with Platt and Kevin on this one. You can refine your understanding of the interaction of rocks in such a way as to use the term experience. But this strains the meaning of the term to such an extent as to almost guarantee that its usage will be confusing and misleading.
Experience involves subjects and objects, whether they are the product or the cause of experience. The interaction of rocks involves only objects and is better understand as an event or an occasion. -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, March 17, 2007 12:14 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [MD] -elitist ideas Quoting ARLO J BENSINGER JR <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Nowhere did I say rocks or shoes experience social and/or intellectual patterns, > nor even biological patterns, necessary to experience pain and formulate > post-experience reflection on the event (and of producing the sound "ouch"). > > But rocks do experience inorganic value, its what holds them together, makes > them fall, etc. Just because we know what holds the elements of rocks together and makes them fall doesn't say anything about what they experience, or if they experience anything at all, including other inorganic patterned rocks. ------------------------------------------------- This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/ 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.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/ 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.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
