From: Arlo J. Bensinger (ajb102@psu.edu)
Date: Fri Nov 04 2005 - 06:41:54 GMT
[Arlo replied to Ham re: "reality as made up of symbols and words."]
No one has ever said this, and this demostrates only the inability to grasp
evolutionary, emergentist patterns.
[Scott]
Correction. I have said it (and still do), though I would revise it to say
"every thing/event is a sign", which is to say "reality" also includes the
interpreting of signs. The problem with Ham, though, is that when anyone
says anything, this somehow gets ascribed to everyone. So he is confusing
what I have said with what you and Ian and Erin say (which is not to say
that you three are all saying exactly the same thing either).
[Arlo]
Corrected. If I'm not mistaken, Ian has also mentioned the idea that semiotics
undergirds the inorganic and biological levels, where my position is that it
emerges at the social level. This is something I would like to explore further.
(Ian- if I have your take wrong, sorry.)
[Scott]
And, by the way, it is not that I am unable to understand "evolutionary,
emergentist patterns", but that I don't think that's how new patterns come
to be, that emergentism is just made up to maintain materialism. But that's a
whole 'nother discussion.
[Arlo]
And one I'd like to have. Bear in mind that my vitriol was at the "emergence"
:-) again at that Great Proprietary Self, and how anyone not grasping their Me
by both hands and screaming "Yeehah!" is somehow essentially devoid of meaning.
All puns intended.
Mayhap the "Me" is a Freudian "cigar"? Would explain the masturbatory glee some
affix to its position, no?
Anyway, my accusations about misunderstanding evolutionary, emergentist patterns
was specifically about those who pull the dialogue down into (what I would say
are SOMist) patterns of "Me" or "Collective". Clearly, there is value and
specificity in both. Without the collective, there is no "Me", and without "Me"
there is no "collective". The choices are not only to Worship One, but to
recognize both as sides of a 2-dimensional coin. (Money analogy to appease the
capitalists among us). ;-)
Anyways, Scott, it is your position that everything is a sign? Let's take
Pirsig's amoeba and vinegar analogy. Your position is that the amoeba's
response is semiotic? How?
Arlo
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 : Fri Nov 04 2005 - 07:01:26 GMT