>[Micah] > "Self", like all concepts, is human and cannot apply to cats or any > animals.
> Craig > That argument can't be right; otherwise: > "Furry", like all concepts, is human and cannot apply to cats or > any animals. Micah Correct. They're not furry - they just are. We say they're furry, that is a human concept we place on an animal. Animals don't have the concept "furry". That is our measurement of reality, and only we measure reality. Furry doesn't exist without humans, nor does reality. [Krimel] So they are what they are regardless of what label we put on them? They are indifferent to our descriptions? Seems like cats to me. Whether they measure reality and how are questions best left unto catkind. Mortals, such as we, can only speculate on such matters. But when we do, words like "Self" and "furry" and "sensual" and "attentive" come easily to mind. We can apply them as we will, but cats remain free to ignore them. 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/
