[MD] Keep on ...

[MarshaV]

Greetings Mark,


On May 16, 2011, at 10:36 PM, 118 wrote:

> Hi Marsha,
> 
> Sometimes what a word means to one can be seen by what antonym one
> chooses for it.  Therefore, I challenge you to present an antonym for
> reify or any of its derivatives.  You may find this difficult since an
> antonym of such a thing is a reification in itself (if I get your
> drift about this concept).  Therefore unreify or deriefy or areify are
> nonsense and do not exist.

Speaking conventionally, I would choose 'interconnectedness' as a 
antonym.  But of course words, with their definition like a cage, 
reify.   


> What you may find, however, is that the antonym of reify is a finger
> pointing right at Dynamic Quality.  Does this help at all with the
> reify concept?

Thanks for the help.  



Marsha







> 
> On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 8:56 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>> 
>> Hi Mark,
>> 
>> I am sure you are sick of my posts, but I had this article from the
>> interent that might explain more of my understanding of reification
>> from a Buddhist point-of-view.  Here's a little bit quoted from
>> the article and the url:
>> 
>> "To reify is usually defined as mistakenly regarding an abstraction as a thing. It is derived from the Latin word res meaning 'thing'.
>> 
>> Reification in Western philosophy means treating an abstract belief or hypothetical construct as if it were a concrete, physical entity. In other words, it is the error of treating as a "real thing" something which is not a real thing, but merely an idea.
>> 
>> In Buddhist philosophy the concept of reification goes further. Reification means treating any functioning phenomenon as if it were a real, permanent 'thing', rather than an impermanent process."
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> http://seanrobsville.blogspot.com/2009/12/reification-in-buddhism-ultimate-and.html
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Marsha
>> 
>> 


 
___