Magnus Berg (MagnusB@DataVis.se)
Fri, 26 Sep 1997 03:24:11 +0100
>> Magnus:
>> Both are language, ways of communication on different scales.
>
>Yes. But so what? When I said that language spawned intellectual value I
>was talking about human language, specifically. Neural contractions have
>a biological function - that's what matters.
My greatest concern about human language is that it requires intellect
to
both send and interpret. To me that's an impossible situation which I
had
to resolve.
>
>> Magnus:
>> Is *that* what you think? Don't you see I'm not throwing anything away?
>> I'm just applying it on a different scale.
>
>Well perhaps that wasn't what you set out to do. But if you follow your
>ideas to their logical conclusion that's what happens. Maybe I've been
>misinterpreting your ideas but didn't you say that biological value
>wasn't much to do with biology. This is completely at odds with Pirsig's
>explanations of biological value. It is throwing away Pirsigs'
>explanations of biological value.
And I was just about to say I followed Pirsig's ideas to *their* logical
conclusion. About biology: I said, I meant to say anyway, that biology
was the first organic patterns that appeared here on earth. But I don't
think biology are the only possible organic patterns. Biology is a
subset
of the organic level. I have concentrated rather much on what I think is
organic patterns that are not biology to try to show this. That is also
why I persist on calling the level organic, not biological.
> And I don't think Pirsig
>> really
>> defined the levels anywhere, he gave examples but that's not
>> definitions.
>
>Sorry I kicked myself as soon as I saw the word "definition". I'm
>realizing that when you're talking about the MoQ it's so easy to use
>words casually and then find out later that you've tripped yourself up.
Yeah I know what you mean, posting to LS is not done in a minute.
But on this definition thing, I really want to have definitions of the
*static* levels. They are static, they have always been and will always
be static. Ok, you can give examples till you have exhausted the
vocabulary but if anyone can do that, he/she must have some internal
rules where to put each word from the vocabulary. I want these rules.
Without definitions, we are confined to inductive use of the MoQ.
Deduction will be totally closed to us and I'm not very thrilled about
that perspective.
And yes, the concept of definitions is intellectual, so what? That's
what we use intellectual patterns for. So that we can look into the
future and predict predictable events, and also to affect the future.
Magnus
>
-- post message - mailto:skwok@spark.net.hk unsubscribe/queries - mailto:diana@asiantravel.com homepage - http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/4670
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu May 13 1999 - 16:41:56 CEST