[MD] The Greeks?

[MarshaV]

Greetings Matt,

I felt the need to edit for the purpose of the example. 


 

On Jun 10, 2010, at 10:40 PM, Matt Kundert wrote:

> 
> Mary said:
> The levels are but a representation of reality.  Given a 
> choice, would you prefer to access the representation or 
> the thing represented?
> 
> Matt:
> This is what I would call a fake choice, between a 
> representation and a thing-in-itself.  If that were a real 
> choice, who wouldn't rather have the thing itself?  But 
> philosophy since Descartes and Locke, two people largely 
> responsible for imposing the "representational mind" 
> between us and reality (though Kant locked it all into 
> place), hasn't been able to say practically what it means 
> to get to the thing-in-itself.
> 
> So, given a choice, I punch the dilemma between the 
> horns, throw sand in its eyes, and scurry out of the arena.
> 
> Marsha said:
> I love the opposite-from-non-x , such as 
> opposite-from-non-justice or opposite-from-non-copper, or 
> opposite-from-non-zebra, or even opposite-from-non-father, 
> as a representation of a pattern.  So many attributes of 
> 'thingness' seem to disappear with its use.  Maybe it may be 
> useful as a model.
> 
> Matt:
> Aye, it's a good way to get the hang of potentially infinite 
> number of things one can say about any particular "thing," 
> which leads one to think there is no essence to that thing, 
> just a multiplicity of ways of looking at all dependent on 
> what you want it for.


Marsha:
Aye, it's a good way to get the hang of potentially infinite 
number of analogues one can use concerning any particular 
pattern, which leads one to understand there is no essence to 
that "thing," just a multiplicity of ways of looking at all dependent 
on what you want it for.




___