Indie, a rose, by any other name...

[Rollerderby]

[url]http://www.loveforum.net/love-advice-forum/30321-doormats-4.html[/url] <---- deriving continued conversation from here.

Here, let's talk about this here, Indie, since you are right that the original thread I posted does not, in fact, have much to do with what we we began talking about. But I find it interesting, and you as well.

You and I are not on the same page, but it's not surprising; you are a scientist, clearly, and I am a writer. We are, and probably always will, see things on the other sides of the fence. But one major difference between us, is that I am not condescending to your intelligence, while you seem quite obliged to condescend to mine. Superiority complex maybe? I'll do this in an MLA essay writing form, they loved to teach us to debate.

"The concept of writing should define the field of a science." ([url]http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/fr/derrida.htm[/url])

Words shape ideas. Ideas shape realities. I'm not going to get up on a platform and say I know more about you in science. If what you wanted was a definition, that was what you should have asked for. In modern psychology everything is a syndrome. Normal doesn't exist. 'Syndrome' connotes a negative idea in your head, something that is out of place that would be better served if not there at all. 'Syndrome' connotes a neutral label in my mind. Something that would exist or not exist in a human being regardless of whether it is defined or not. You do not feel the term, "Velvet-glove in an iron fist" is something that should be considered a syndrome. It is a positive term you were using, and you felt I was defining it in a negative way. my post,

We love words, all of us, don't we? You perceive syndrome as a bad thing? To me, it's just another way psychiatry has labeled life as a form. Derrida discusses how language is never an absolute, and words are perceived differently by those who have experienced life in different ways. Your words convey different picture ideas in my mind than yours and all that.

But other would argue that 90% of conversation is non-verbal, so how can you possibly truly understand other individual from the internet? Clarity, like cleanliness is a virtue. And shall we say, next to Godliness? Syndrome was my word, not yours.

explained my view right there. My comment on saying we all love words is a bit tongue in cheek, because it's true. I'm not entirely shocked that this has turned into a debate ;-)
The word, syndrome, evokes different neurological paths in your mind to light up, your mind travels down memories and definitions in your brain all at lightening speed! From a simple word use. I'm not arguing that when a car comes blaring around the corner, it's not going to hit me. But I will say that my experiences as I die, or do not die, mayhaps I struggle to live whereas others would give up, are singular to me. Pain, pleasure, human experience ... it's impossible to say that people experience these all the same. Some people enjoy being tied up and whipped in sex, others prefer feathers and Barry Manalow.

"Saussure takes up the traditional definition of writing which, already in Plato and Aristotle, was restricted to the model of phonetic script and the language of words. Let us recall the Aristotelian definition: “Spoken words are the symbols of mental experience and written words are the symbols of spoken words.” Saussure: “Language and writing are two distinct systems of signs; the second exists for the sole purpose of representing the first”. (same website as before, from the chapter "The Outside and The Inside").

This is exactly what I'm trying to get at. Words, are fluid, but so much concrete is based on them. The entire way our civilization functions is based on communicating with words (which replaced pictures) to express what we mean. Yet, words have so many meanings. In one thread, Vashti recommends to a girl not to get tested for Bi-Polar disorder because the label could be more damaging since not all labels are aptly affixed.

Now, let's look more closely at what you have said to me,

Definitions in language exist to improve communication and reduce incorrect interpretation. Certainly, you are free to deviate from standard accepted definitions & come up with your own, but then the onus is on you to explain yourself if you want the receiver of your communication to understand you. Just like a how mathematician (or physicist) very carefully defines terms when solving problems, especially if it involves any new math. You failed to properly define your reinterpretation of a standard word, and muddied the communication waters. This is in direct contradiction of your claim to value "clarity". This is the crux of the issue.

This is the crux of the issue. And anyone will tell you how important clarity is. I was being clear. I was citing where my argument came from, illustrating it with examples, and explaining as clearly as possible, the ideals expressed by a wordy philosopher. He is indeed a bit thick to get through. But now that you have read above, you can see that I have defined how I defined the definition.

But see, it's all in how you read something too. I am a bit dry, and sarcastic. If you read me without certain inflections in my voice, you are going to read my words differently than you would if you heard me speaking. This is because of how much humans communicate with non-verbals--and everyone who reads loosing meaning in words. Words are simply sounds littered with emotions and tonal inflections. And linguistics is an actual science. This conversation would be different having it over a beer at the pub, which sounds mighty fine if you ask me, versus typing it out like an essay on the internet.

Just so we are clear--- I get you. But your perspective on this is pretty tunnel visioned. Plato illustrated in his story of the enlightenment trap:

There are people chained inside a cave, facing away from the outside of the cave. The only light they see is a glimmer from the outside, but never having seen actual sunlight they are limited in their knowledge. One man is able to break free. At first the sunlight blinds him. Then his eyes adjust and he sees that he is seeing true sunlight, and realizes what he thought to believe was light his whole life was a lie. He runs back to the other people chained inside, to tell him of what he saw. But the problem is, they cannot even conceive of what he has seen, as he could not conceive of it before he saw it. In fact, they aren't even aware of the chains on their arms and legs. He might as well be speaking to a brick wall. His words cannot describe the mental picture. This is the problem with words.

If one has not experienced something for himself, words only strike the already built in mental pictures.

Scientists seek to find life's great answers, but science has not found that many answers. Maybe math and physics sure, but when it comes to understanding out universe, we are still quite limited. Science is changing all the time, and there are few Laws but many theories.

Philosophers are just asking the questions that provoked science in the first place. But to stop questioning is to stop learning.

Socrates said he knew nothing. In recognizing the blip on the radar screen, and the humility in that you open your mind to the possibilities that are instead of closing off options and ideas that may hold some merit. This is what you are doing in dismissing my argument.

doll... I was finishing grad school when ... (Oooooh, lookie! A guy who actually understands math! Wow, and 8-syllable words… he must be saying something important!) ...Here endeth the lesson. And no worries about my intellect. I am not in the slightest insecure about it. You seem to require this crucial lesson, I am an educator, there you go. Now... doll...

And, just so we are also clear, I would appreciate it if you could chill with the condensation. (I don't even like it on my glass in 90 degree weather OH!!! LOL, sorry pun-ny joke) That's great that you have a million diplomas, and that you are an educator, but your argument would hold more merit if you weren't constantly insulting mine. I'm no doll that came in a pink package with "dress me" written on the side. I'm not a circle you can fit into a square hole. You are free to disagree with me--and obviously you are going to whether I give you permission or not-- but I believe in freedom of speech, and you also fall into that bubble. Just do me a favor and argue your side instead of relying so heavily on your critique of mine. EDIT: me.

The thing you are failing to realize is that neither of us is wrong or right in the context of I win, you lose or vice versa. This is your 'truth' and my 'truth' as opposed to 'Truth' which is universal. The world is not black or white, and ideas do not fit neatly into science. But I am certainly not condemning science, I am just taking this point of view in the debate. Someday, I'm sure I will be somewhere arguing your side of the coin but today I stand here.

[doppelgaenger]

Oh Jesus. Are you guys going to smack each other over the head with your diplomas?

[Yggdrasil]

Can we for a minute get down to earth and admit that misunderstandings happen and that it is absolutely not necessary to have a huge big rant about that, because this isn't a debate, this is a rant.

Be really great and admit you're human, with imperfections.


Shake hands, have a beer and get along

[lovesjoyajm]

Heh, the semantics debate reminds me of this:



And Indi, if you want to debate, it might be best to not insult everyone.

[Doc Durian]

I wouldn't call it a rant.

It's an issue being raised with the tools of debate versus the alternative... a dirty verbal street fight.

Both are entertaining to witness, although the debate factor is a clear winner in the logic and integrity stakes.

Who's got the popcorn?

[Sonrisa]

ha ha, i knew doc and roller were the same person lol

[misombra]

i think doc is bohemiandonut.

[Sonrisa]

i think doc is bohemiandonut.

what kind of fruit is that?

[Doc Durian]

i think doc is bohemiandonut.

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar...

[misombra]

we're having cigars with our popcorn?

[Doc Durian]

Don't forget the donuts either...

[Sonrisa]

[misombra]

donuts and popcorn shit man this argument is gonna make me fat.

[Sonrisa]

i've been having bagels with caviar spread the whole week. don't talk to me about fat lol

[vashti]

i think doc is bohemiandonut.

I agree that they are the most similar in temperment. The only thing is that doc hasn't ranted (yet) about the virtues of marijuana smoking...