Re: MD A bit of reasoning

From: David Morey (us@divadeus.freeserve.co.uk)
Date: Thu Sep 09 2004 - 18:14:17 BST

  • Next message: ml: "Re: MD and the LIE DETECTOR test"

    Scott said:

    > Yes, we need one, but not for the reasons you give. My reason is simply
    > that Intellect that gets the biological out of the inorganic, etc,. is
    > Intellect well beyond my imagining.

    DM:Agreed.

    > While human intellect is dominated by symbol usage, so is all other. The
    > particular is a symbol for the universal. The next step in the argument,
    > then, is to say that all reality is semiotic. (This is Peirce's view, by
    > the way.)

    DM: I refer to artificial/cultural symbols like writing, pictures, language.
    So I think we need this distinction as well. You can make a case
    for everything is semiotic but then there are distinctions within that.

    > And I don't see why all making of SQ by DQ shouldn't be viewed as
    > contingent. A Buddhist would see it that way.

    DM: I use contingent as non-creative & without purpose, you could expect
    some properties to
    be contingent in this way, i.e. they could be different without changing the
    world
    much, properties of water, oxygen. the eye, seem much more purposeful &
    necessary
    for their uses.

    MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
    MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net

    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
    http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Sep 09 2004 - 20:46:01 BST