[MD] Philosophy and Abstraction

[Dan Glover]

Hello everyone

On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 10:58 PM, John Carl <ridgecoyote at gmail.com> wrote:
> Greetings Dan and everyone,
>
> john prev:
>
>> > I assure you that I'm being sincere when I say the only "reality" I can ever
>> > experience  meaningfully is through a narrative of relative concepts- which
>> > is what "language" is and thus it seems to me, the only pragmatically good
>> > way to approach it is just admit it's language, all the way down.
>>
>> Dan:
>>
>> Intellectually speaking, yes. But reality is more than that. Perhaps
>> that's why I consider myself a storyteller rather than a philosopher.
>> I use language to tell a (fictional) story but there is something
>> there much deeper than the language I use. As I said, you know that
>> too. I can tell by the stories you have shared. Language allows us to
>> express value but language is not the value we express. No good
>> storyteller would ever admit that it is only language all the way
>> down, would they?
>>
>
> John:  In a reductionist sense, no.  And I see what you mean.  I did
> place the caveat somewhere along the lines of this discussion that
> language as "i'm defining it" - an expansion of language, just as the
> MoQ proposes an expansion of "intellect", I'm urging an expansion of
> "language".

Dan:

If you don't mind, I would prefer that we stick to dictionary
definitions; it makes for a better discussion, one in which we can,
perhaps, at least reach some common ground. According to
dictionary.com there are a number of definitions pertaining to
language. If it seems worthwhile, you might want to check them out and
see which one(s) might be helpful to further the discussion.
Otherwise, it seems rather fruitless to continue.

How does the MOQ expand on intellect?


>John:
> And this really started as a topic of discussion, at least in my mind,
> from a posting Adrie shared about the bits of the matter being bytes.
> That in a very real sense, It IS information, all the way down.
> Meaningful, relational information is what reality is, deep down.
> Another way of saying "Meaningful, relational information"  is
> "language".

Dan:
Within a certain context, yes.

>John:
> And what is language, but a story?  A narrative is the only basis for
> meaning and understanding possible, so I'd be just as content saying
> "it's all stories, all the way down".

Dan:

Actually, I could almost go along with that. But still, there is more
to reality than can be told in a story. So, no, I beg to differ with
you. Of course, it is not something I can tell... rather, you just
have to see for yourself. And you will know.

Thank you,

Dan