From: Anton Sherwood (dasher@netcom.com)
Date: Mon Mar 30 1998 - 00:39:42 MST
> Lee Daniel Crocker (lcrocker@mercury.colossus.net)
> >.... You spend pages and pages
> >on defining "Identity" and claim that this is an exercise
> >of reason in itself. You can have your definition if you
> >like--it's no skin off my nose. But the old definition--
> >even if it's "wrong" in some sense--manages to feed me,
> >build houses, move me around, and generally make my life
> >interesting. If you want us to accept your definition,
> >show us how using your definition /accomplishes/ something
> >tangible and real in my life.
Ian Goddard wrote:
> IAN: That there is a tangible world is a result
> of the fact that identity is holistic. If atomism
> was somehow true, there would be no tangible world.
> Every thing is what it is only due to relations.
> So holistic identity gives you a tangible world.
So now "identity" means ... interaction? tangibility? reality?
Is there anything that "identity" does not mean? ;)
> For me, a quest into the nature of truth seems much
> more interesting and important than faster cars and
> better mouse traps. To me it seems that seeing such
> things as the end-all measure of value is trivial
> and shallow, but that's what makes me a weirdo.
Well, if you don't mind that everyone thinks you're chasing your tail,
mazel tov.
-- "How'd ya like to climb this high without no mountain?" --Porky Pine Anton Sherwood *\\* +1 415 267 0685
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:48:50 MST