ALPI vs Newspeak
January 17th, 2008, search relatedRelated posts :: What’s it all about? ALPI :: What’s it all about? ALPI :: Is the Root of ‘Being’ Relevant? :: What’s it all about? ALPI
ALPI vs Newspeak
GEVANS613 at aol.com wrote:
>An instantiation of the subject is performed by the utterance of the
>subject name alone. In the example: /*Mark Twain is bald.*/ the
>nominatum [that which is named] - the subject name *Mark Twain* is
>instantly instantiated in the mind of the reader or addressee without
>any need of the *is* word.
whatever is “instantly instantiated in the mind of the reader or
addressee” is a phenomenological reality to that experiencer.
among the questions that concern philosophers is whether there is a
metaphenomenal reality correlated with the phenomenological reality
instantiated within the experiencer; and, if so, is that metaphenomenal
reality physical or non-physical?
if I say ‘2 is an even prime number’ a phenomenological reality is
instantiated in the experiencer of my statement. is there a
metaphenomenal reality associated with ‘2′? if so, is it a physical
reality or a non-physical reality?
>Bottom line? To be, was, were, be, was, am, are, is, will be have
>NOTHING at all to do with existence and EVERYTHING to do with the WAY
>things exist.
>Where does this leave Joe’s ontological paradigms? I do not know.
my concerns are left outside the scope of your edition of the newspeak
dictionary.
you have redefined our language so that there is no grammatical way to
ponder the fact that I am without also making a claim as to what I am.
Michael E’s edition of the newspeak dictionary is only slightly
different from yours. his version allows one to ask ‘what am I?’ but
there is no grammatical way to disagree with his answer, ‘I am a being’.
Joe
–
Philosophy is, after all, done ultimately in the first person for the
first person. — H-N Castaneda
@^@~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~@^@
http://what-am-i.net
@^@~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~@^@
