Doug Renselle (renselle@on-net.net)
Wed, 18 Mar 1998 21:13:50 +0100
Anthony and TLS,
See comments below -
Ant McWatt wrote:
>
...
> I`m still not sure if
> the use of subjects and objects is a good idea even
> if you know what these terms mean in "MoQese".
> I`m tempted to bury them in the scrapheap of
> dead cultural terms but we still use terms such as "up" and
> "down" which were invented for a flat world and not a
> sphere so I really don`t know.
>
> What do other members think?
>
> Best Wishes,
>
> Anthony.
>
Anthony,
I suggested a long time ago (months) in an email on context that we need
to state our context here in TLS. Also, I made it clear THAT is an
extra burden which most of us (including me) neglect in favor of stream
of consciousness (more dynamic) thinking.
It's too static, but I favor using SOMese juxtaposed to its equivalent
MoQese (e.g., in separate paragraphs) whenever we insist on using the
SOM dichotomies. One large benefit is our improved ability to
communicate the message to SOMites. Another is our own clarity. There
are other benefits like verification, etc. It's definitely more work
and more words.
Mtty Anthony and TLS,
Doug Renselle.
-- The complementary view of truth is many truths which are contextual, and by being contextual they leave room for the good to rule. It is not objectivism, which has no place for the good, and it is not relativism, which has no place for truth.By Hugo Fjelsted Alroe in his email to The Lila Squad on 11 March 1998, 17:44 titled, "LS Re: Rambling on intellect and life."
-- post message - mailto:lilasqd@hkg.com 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 - 16:42:56 CEST