Ron

But is there nt a distinction between symbols and objects?
Symbols seem to imply subjective interpretation, objects
a causal relationship?

DM


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ron Kulp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 04, 2007 1:16 PM
Subject: Re: [MD] Perception,evolution and the spirit


> 
> 
> [DM]
> 
> Is there not a distinction between language and perception?
> Is perception not clearly less full of only objects than language?
> It is also possible to talk in terms of what is experienced as feels,
> smells etc and avoid object talk. SO is useful of course, it is adding
> the M to make SOM that is clearly questionable. Have you tried
> linguistic phenomenalism? -try a goggle search on it.
> 
> [Ron]
> Dm, I want to yes there is a distinction between perception and
> language, but even in my most
> non lingual moments visually I process data in terms of understanding
> the object I'm seeing.
> Carl jung suggests that all experience is based on symbols created from
> the first experiences
> of when we were children that even our perception is entirely based on
> symbol relation.
> I believe when we experience something and have no idea of what it is,
> that is pure non-s/o
> distinction. Ever get lost and have no idea where you are then connect
> up with a road you
> are familier with, a road you use all the time, ever notice how your
> perception changes when you
> realize where you are? I see s/o as symbol relation and therefore view
> language as a complex form
> Of symbol relation for language evokes symbol imagery.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ron Kulp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2007 2:41 PM
> Subject: Re: [MD] Perception,evolution and the spirit
> 
> 
>>
>>
>>
>> [DM]
>>
>> I meant ZMM of course. But if you fancy a change try Bishop Berkeley
> or
>> Whitehead's Process & Reality for explanation of why the subject
> object
>> language is optional and questionable.
>>
>> [Ron]
>> DM, language is subject/object. Any time you define anything it is
>> reduced to subject/object.
>> I also believe perception follows suit, unless you grew up with no
>> language and hold no
>> definition for anything, or you are a victim of alzhiemers disease or
>> catatonic, to drop
>> subject object is to drop all conscious definition of anything and
>> percieve all as one.
>> Are you able to do this?
>> MOQ does not allow me to overcome this but it does allow me to be
> aware
>> of it. It
>> Allows me to refine my value judgements and make more accurate
>> decisions.
>> MOQ has not changed the way I percieve everyday reality but it has
>> changed my
>> acceptance of experiences. I no longer discount things based past
>> experiences
>> I strive to take into account all factors of experience  before making
>> A value judgement.
>>
>> A zen monk once said: before enlightenment, chop wood, carry water.
>> After enlightenment,
>> Chop wood, carry water.
>>
>> If you term SOM to mean absolutism, either/or excluded middle logic,
>> then yes
>> It is optional. But as I stated, it is a much different story to
> change
>> your
>> Perception of subject/object reality,  that is what I'm talking about,
>> if you
>> would have read alittle more closely before being too quick to fire
> off
>> a sarcastic
>> Quip.
>>
>> To all, I do make an effort not to use sarcasim or abuse, I would
>> appreciate the same
>> from all of you. I do not feel this is too much to ask. If you feel
> that
>> it is,
>> please do not respond to my posts, that easy. Thanks.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Ron Kulp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> To: <[email protected]>
>> Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2007 8:08 PM
>> Subject: Re: [MD] Perception,evolution and the spirit
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Ron said:
>>>> Subject/object perception can not be "dropped" like a unstylish hand
>>>> bag.
>>>> Anyone who thinks they do not percieve in terms of subjects and
>>>> objects is fooling themselves.
>>>
>>>
>>> I know a good book you should read.
>>>
>>> DM
>>>
>>>
>>> [Ron]
>>> Do tell, I could use a good read. Thanks!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 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/
>> 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/
> 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/

Reply via email to