[MD] The MOQ difference

[118]

Fair enough Craig, we have different delimitations of the words being used.
 But, I think I get what you mean.  Concepts as a inner function of the
brain which is more than just for communication.  The word dog may be
composed of 12-13 interconnected neurons in my brain which fire in such a
way as to make dog appear in my mind's eye.  (of course I am just making
that neuron stuff up, just an analogy).

I was differentiating between the written word and its representation in my
head.  In this way I see language as a trigger.  But as you say, concept
could be used to represent that inner sense.  If this is what you mean, then
certainly concepts do result in language, and our living in a culture could
arise as concepts.  It may be more of a two way street however.  Do levels
interact in a dynamic way?  If so, how can we measure such interaction and
allow prediction?  (Serious question from the uninitiated).

Mark


On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 9:07 AM, <craigerb at comcast.net> wrote:

> [Craig, previously]
>
>
> > "concepts are provided by our language" &
> > "language is provided by our culture"
>
>
> .
> [Mark]
> > If a concept is a string of words that has meaning,
> > where does that meaning come from?
>
> .
> I would say "a string of words that has meaning" is a sentence,
> not a concept.
> .
> [Mark]
> > Certainly the words are neutral, just sounds.
>
> .
> Not certain. Words are not just sounds, but have meaning.
>
>
> .
> [Mark]
> > In my opinion, a concept must trigger an
> > inner reaction that is independent of the words.
>
> .
> The inner reaction triggered by a concept (for instance, "dog")
> is NOT independent of the inner reaction tiggered by the word "dog",
> but is IDENTICAL.
> Craig
> 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/md/archives.html
>