From: Elizaphanian (elizaphanian@tiscali.co.uk)
Date: Sat Jun 28 2003 - 01:02:35 BST
> Steve:
> My point was that whether or not we recognize Tarzan upon meeting him in the
> jungle will have nothing to do with what ideas he holds. We would first
> recognize his biological makeup, but he still would not feel human to us
> because he would not be a participant in our social patterns. But you are
> right in that whether or not he holds any ideas at all would also be
> important in the question of his humanity.
Wittgenstein: If a lion could speak, we would not understand him. (Supporting your point, which is
one of the reasons why I think language (technically: depth grammar) operates at level 3, not level
4)
Sam
"Phaedrus is fascinated too by the description of the motive of 'duty toward self' which is an
almost exact translation of the Sanskrit word 'dharma', sometimes described as the 'one' of the
Hindus. Can the 'dharma' of the Hindus and the 'virtue' of the Ancient Greeks be identical?" - The
Eudaimonic MoQ says yes. "Lightning hits!"
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 : Sat Jun 28 2003 - 13:42:21 BST