[MD] The Menu/Reality issue

[MarshaV]

At 10:26 AM 11/14/2008, you wrote:
> >Marsha
> >I've explained my interpretation of SPoVs before.  I'm not sure that
> >explaining again will make my explanation any clearer, but I'll
> >try.  All SPoVs are named, conceptual analogues.  Inorganic and
> >organic spovs are conceptual in nature but have as their _referent_
> >external natural phenomenon.  Social and intellectual spovs are
> >conceptual in nature and have as their _referent_ other complex
> >constellation of interrelated spovs.
> >
> >[Krimel]
> >I think I agree with this but every time I say something like this I get
> >accused of SOM. What make your claim immune from the charge? After all you
> >have mental concepts that _refer_ to something external.
>
>Marsha
>I believe you think this external natural phenomenon is something
>like entities, TiTs.  To me, external, natural phenomenon is
>Quality.  Quality, which cannot be defined.  It's ALL Quality!
>
>[Krimel]
>Your beliefs about what I think are as irrelevant to what I actually think
>as my beliefs about the planet Jupiter are to the 5th planet. TiTs are not
>at all like "entities". TiTs are inherently unknowable. From the empirical
>position of the MoQ, knowledge is derived from the senses. Even with
>instrumentation that extends them, our senses are not capable of telling us
>everything about TiTs. What we interact with, always is the product of our
>senses and memories; which as you say _refer_ to some imperfectly sensed
>external.
>
>It is that imperfection of the senses that renders Quality indefinable. Our
>apprehension of the external referent is incomplete. It carries with it,
>always, some level of uncertainty. This does not mean that we can not and do
>not construct patterns of thought about those _referents_. As Ron and I seem
>to have agreed, our definitions and patterns of thought are not held as
>absolute truths but as probabilistic estimates. The truth value of the
>patterns we construct is judged on their capacity to reduce our uncertainty
>about the future state or consequences of those patterns.


Krimel,

Static patterns of value are conventionally, conceptual 
constructs.  That would include 'probabilistic estimates'.  Static 
patterns of value, they come, they go.


Marsha







.
.
The Universe is uncaused, like a net of jewels in which each is a 
reflection of all the others in a fantastic, interrelated harmony without end.
.
.