[MD] Apologies for Dropped Threads

[ADRIE KINTZIGER]

Ian Glendinning.

quote, short.
Semantics of difference....

---------------------------------
Adrie.
I think Dmb is building the case for differences of semantics or semantics
of differences to be condensed to a protokol that upholds the metaphysikal
environment to stay on the solid side.

If one builds a protokol to agree upon, and to make progress based upon the
agreed obsevables and variables, it is of the utmost importance to hold the
line as, 'differences in semantics'

If we don't, we will generate only conditional truths, derived from other
conditional truths, this would make them relative so to speak.
Simply changing some of the variables in the protokol, will induce new
results,
but they will reflect only the previous result.

Without a solid protokol, agreed upon in advance,all patterns will keep on
differentiating, deviating,halting upon one single stopsign-word.

But this is only a shard of a tought , still a bit derived from the niche of
inductive reasoning/analythikal reasoning.

imho.
Adrie


2011/1/6 Ian Glendinning <ian.glendinning at gmail.com>

> Matt, wow, we're back to very long mails again ...
> Not ignoring it, but I may be some time ... just a quickie ...
>
> Yes I did see that you had imparted that view (it was part of my
> original summary), yet some Dave / Steve / ?still seemed (to me) to be
> arguing semantics of definitions. (See one-liner response to the other
> one.)
>
> Semantics of difference BTW (your James quote) is pretty much at the
> root of any MoQish / Metaphysics view I hold. (Difference that makes a
> difference that is, not difference that happens to exist in word
> games)
> Ian
>
> On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 8:08 PM, Matt Kundert
> <pirsigaffliction at hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hey Ian,
> >
> > Ian said:
> > My summary is (again, but in alternative wording) - you/we are in
> > fact "agreeing" on what the definitions and distinctions ARE (between
> > the different forms of "truth"), but some of us are failing to see the
> > SIGNIFICANCE which others (particularly Dave) see, in our MoQ
> > context. The "Yes, but so what ?" conclusion. (Given the pragmatic
> > rider .... for all practical purposes .... a rider of Dave's you actually
> > clipped-off a quote that I agreed with.)
> >
> > Matt:
> > Sure, absolutely.  I hopefully articulated that ...
> 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
>



-- 
parser