As I've said on this list before, 'labelling' and 'boxes' is what we do;
that's how we 'understand'. Whether it's 'things', or 'concepts', or
'descriptions', we chop the universe up into units in order to comprehend
the incomprehensible. Then we put the units back together again, to see if
they fit together like the original did. If it's a match (as near as we can
discern), then we think we understood, and take that match as 'empirical
proof'. It's that 'discern' question that is at the heart of philosophy,
isn't it?
cheers,
ppl
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Lind" <Trickster@postmark.net>
To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
Sent: 29 April 2000 06:53
Subject: Re: MD The Definition of "Insanity"
> To Ian, Geoff et al.....
>
> Ian - How do "state" and "thing" differ? Only in that one is
> generally viewed as being non-physical and the other is viewed as
> being physical? Whether you call it a thing or a state doesn't change
> that i"it" doesn't exist (in my opinion - and I'm open to having my
> opinion altered - I just need a more convincing argument than I've
> read here) Agaoin - I'm not saying that there aren't people who act
> in a manner that we have chosen to describe as "insane" - just that
> "sanity/insanity" are just terms that we use and in doing so, we put
> the person we labelled into a box.
>
> Geoff - You are getting close to what I'm saying. I just want people
> to break out of the box of labels. You wrote: "My next point is that
> we should define "sanity". What makes a person sane or does sanity
> really exsist?"
>
> Me: I think the problem is from too much defining what is sane
> (either by defining sanity *or* by defining it's opposite - insanity
> (since in my opinion, you can get to know what somehting is by
> defining everything it isn't) There is too much defining going on.
> This person is "sane" - this person is "insane" - why? because they
> aren't showing abberational symptoms? because they are? There just
> is "being" - we attempt to label the *way* a person is being because
> it makes life easier. I read a quote today "a label is an attempt to
> assert control and manage uncertainty" a static latch?) (the quote was
> from Rachel Naomi Remen, an author of a book whose title i forgot to
> write down)
>
> Well...enough for now. And Seriously folks - I do want feedback -
> differing of my opinion - try and show me that there is such a
> thing/state/being of insanity (or sanity)
>
> Be Good
>
> Shalom
>
> David Lind
> Trickster@postmark.net
>
>
>
> MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
> Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
> MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
>
> To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
> http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
>
>
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:00:42 BST