[MD] Mystics and Brains

[craigerb at comcast.net]

[Arlo] 
> You're arguing the two statements "man is a wolf" and "men flirt with women" are 
> exactly identical. Neither has any other meaning except for the other? What 
> about man's aggressiveness? Man's social packing? Man's nurturing of their 
> young? Man's predatory nature? Certainly we can keep "unpacking" this metaphor 
> on and on and on, but do any of these things capture the same insight and 
> meaning as "man is a wolf"? I'd say absolutely not. 

[Craig] 
My point is not that the two statements ALWAYS have the same meaning, only that SOMETIMES they can.
CRAIG: (referring to a man chatting with a woman at a bar) "He's a wolf".
ARLO:  "Why do you think he's nurturing of his young?"
CRAIG:  "I don't.  I just meant "He's flirting with that woman".
ARLO:  "When you say "He's flirting with that woman", are you speaking metaphorically?"
CRAIG:  "No."

[Arlo] 
> I'm avoiding the condescending remark

:-(

[Arlo]
> If I could tell you what they symbolize in "literal words", the art would be 
> meaningless. They may serve to point towards different "things" for every 
> person, but always the pointer is going outside the (any) symbolic system. 

If what is symbolized is different for everyone and you can't say what it is, you don't have a symbolic system.
Craig