[MD] Mystics and Brains

[pholden at davtv.com]

Quoting ARLO J BENSINGER JR <ajb102 at psu.edu>:

> [Platt]
> How do you distinguish between a metaphorical word and literal word?
> 
> [Arlo]
> All words are metaphor. It is a shared understanding in a given pragmatic
> context that makes a word "literal". When I say "voice" (or "mind", or
> "spirit"), and say that as a pointer I find that particular metaphor valuable,
> I do this from an intuitive point, but I don't delude myself into thinking that
> MY valuable metaphor is RIGHT for all people and all times. Indeed, it changes
> for me as well. 

Maybe you don't make a distinction between metaphors and literal words, but
I dare say most grammarians do. In fact, metaphor to them is a figure of
speech along with other figures such as metonymy, alliteration, antithesis,etc.

> [Platt]
> In my view consciousness or mind occurs within entities all the way down to
> particles below the social level who have no "voice" per se.
> 
> [Arlo]
> I never thought I'd hear you argue that atoms have "mind". But now I think we
> are treading into an area where we use these words differently. When I use
> "mind", or "voice", I typically understand this to be intellectual patterns of
> value. An "atom" does not have mind or voice because it is an inorganic pattern
> of value.

Seems you restrict "mind" to human beings. My cat, UTOE, has a mind of his own.

> [Platt]
> As for soul or spirit, I see that as an additional part of being human, as in
> body-mind-spirit, or the "I" in answer to the question, "Who is the I that
> knows me?"
> 
> [Arlo]
> I guess I usually think of "voice", "mind" or "consciousness" as parallel to
> "spirit". What extends down to particles is "value". Although now that I am
> thinking about it, maybe I'd liken "spirit" to "social patterns of value", and
> "mind" to intellectual patterns of value. Hm.
> 
> Body, spirit, mind.
> Biological, social, intellectual.

I'm not surprised you would associate spirit to social as you associate
most everything to that level. I have argued and still argue that intellect
is proprietary (to borrow Ham's nomenclature) to the individual with many
individual copy cats. Likewise, spirit to me refers to an individual's unique
being. To state an absolute, "There's only one Arlo."

  

-------------------------------------------------
This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/