[MD] Dawkins a Materialist (is watching?)

[ian glendinning]

Mark, Platt,

I agree too (I've lost track of where this string of questions have
dotted around the threads).

Reality is.
All reality is (patterns of) value. Words and metaphors are no exception.

I think the original questions were about the literal vs metaphor
distinction. There we really had a question of the evolution of
language and its relation to reality. I've said enough.

Ian

On 1/24/07, pholden at davtv.com <pholden at davtv.com> wrote:
> Quoting Squonkriff at aol.com:
>
> >
> > In a message dated 23/01/2007 13:30:03 GMT Standard Time, pholden at davtv.com
> > writes:
> >
> > Question. Are metaphors (words)  real?
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi Platt,
> > Metaphors are certainly real because they have value.
> > That may sound like a trite answer but it would appear to be a solid moq
> > answer to your question.
> > What do you make of it Platt?
>
> I agree. We couldn't live without 'em.
>
> -------------------------------------------------
> This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/
> moq_discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>