My thinking too (though I wasn't considering the libation portion.)

  -- Enric

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Richard (Show) Hall"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Well, let's bring it up again at Vloggercon after I have been
> thoroughly enculturated via a few beers from Schlomo's bar ... Richard
>
> On 6/4/06, Enric <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I am so tempted to respond.  And where this a group on linguistics,
> > philosophy or such, I would :)
> >
> > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Richard (Show) Hall"
> > <richard@> wrote:
> > >
> > > I don't usually get in on these, but this one really intrigues
me ...
> > > plus, I'm trying to avoid doing my monthly family finances, which is
> > > always a creative adventure ...
> > >
> > > On 6/2/06, Shannon Noble <shannon.sn@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > nothing NEEDS context.
> > >
> > > ... For a "thing" to be a "thing" it needs context. What is a
"thing"?
> > > I couldn't tell you unless I had context, you see. None of any
of this
> > > makes sense without context.
> > >
> > > It seems like you are trying to say vlogs are bad because they are
> > > interpreted within some context (they are "enculturated") ...
This is
> > > the same as saying, vlogs are perceived.
> > >
> > > There is this fundamental process, where an object impinges on a
sense
> > > organ - from than instant the "signal" is translated into a neural
> > > signal, and intensely manipulated, and eventually it is
"labeled" - it
> > > is given meaning probably someone in association areas of the
cortext
> > > (in class, I used to say "then a miracle happens").
> > >
> > > There is nothing that can be labeled or given meaning that is not
> > > "enculterated".
> > >
> > > The best we can do - the only thing we can do - is to recognize that
> > > this process of subjective perception is "reality".
> > >
> > > What we think of as "objective" and "emperical" is ultimately
consensus.
> > >
> > > > you begin falacy at that point. as well as personal manipulation,
> > in order
> > > > to control your world around you.
> > >
> > > ... I guess I would want to know which part of Shannon's
> > > thinking/agurments/perception would NOT be classified as "personal
> > > manipulation" ... everything I'm saying and perceiving here is
> > > certainly "personal manipulation" ... I can't imagine how it
could be
> > > otherwise ...
> > >
> > > >
> > > > langauge is a tool.
> > > >
> > > > used to manipulate in order to get what you want.
> > >
> > >  .... I'm pretty sure what you wrote above would constitute
> > > "language", so, it follows ... well, you know ...
> > >
> > > ... I would say that language is the great and fundamental
abstraction
> > > tool that allows us to function in the world ... and have
interesting
> > > discussions like this, I might add ...
> > >
> > > ... well, that was fun ... Richard
> > >
> > > --
> > > Richard
> > > http://www.richardshow.com
> > >
> > > Save the Internet - Preserve Network Neutrality!
> > > http://www.savetheinternet.com
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Richard
> http://www.richardshow.com
>
> Save the Internet - Preserve Network Neutrality!
> http://www.savetheinternet.com
>







SPONSORED LINKS
Fireant Individual Typepad
Use


YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS




Reply via email to