[MD] The Myth of Reason

[MarshaV]

Greetings Ron,

I've read your essay, but I did not understand what exactly you were 
getting at.  And this post, too, leaves me puzzled.  I'm in the 
pattern mode of exploration, and maybe that's inhibiting my 
understanding.  From your title, I do think I agree with you.  I have 
settled on inductive and deductive logic as useful tools.  Not sure 
about 'is'.  Is it somehow like the scalpel in carving up reality?

Marsha



At 03:53 PM 12/9/2008, you wrote:
>To all,
>In my essay "the function of form" I trace the origins of SOM
>To the Hebrew word "is" and how it effected Greek thought.
>In it I state that Parmenides concluded that "is" or being or
>awareness, always was. That logos, the common understanding,
>the abstract, always existed.
>Plato argued that logos was form. Aristotle maintained that it
>was the arguement from the particular experience to a universal
>understanding.
>Logos is the root word of logic. Logos in christianity was made flesh
>and worshiped as God.
>Parmenides maintained that the only way to realize truth was through
>abstract thought, through reason.
>Logos is the pivotal Greek ideal that wrought SOM.
>The worship of logic as God
>
>Heraclitus popularized the word and as I believe was often misunderstood.
>Heraclitus proclaimed that the world was constatnly in flux and that 
>only through
>the abstract universal understanding of things may any sort of order 
>be derived.
>He stated:
>"all things come to pass in accordance with this word" and "the word 
>is common."
>It is "the account which governs the universe (ta hola, the whole)."
>

.
.

Shoot for the moon.  Even if you miss, you'll land among the stars.........
.
.