At 08:42 AM 6/26/2007, you wrote: >David, Marsha, good thread > >I think that "resonance" is also related to David's earlier >distinction between the patterns that represent our known knowledge >(our mental patterns, however recorded) and the actual "source" of >knowledge - what can actually be "known". > >My take on that source, the thing that distinguishes it from an >ontological view of things with properties, is that the source is the >eptistemic view of knowledge or meaning as the "significance of >relations between things" - The SOMist problem that MOQ solves as >David also put it earlier. > >Value, quality, is about the significance of relations not "objective >poesssions". > >Ian
Ian, This problem I'm having dose seem to be obvious to everyone but me. What is knowledge and how do you separate into two separate levels of mind? Social - Intellectual, should be simple. Knowledge is separate little patterns of value. Cow -biological. Lead - inorganic. watching a soccer game - social. Quantum physics - intellectual. Knowledge - Huh?????? What kind? Maybe I need to put it to a rest for the moment. I'm feeling really stupid. Maybe it's my misunderstanding of 'knowing'. I've always stated that I really know nothing, and now I'm proving my point. Marsha p.s. And I've just spent the day with my three-year old grandson whose questions were an eight-hour bombardment. I need music..... 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/
