|
1/4/98
we are talking about roger scruton subject object
the photograph has a direct link with the object
what do you mean the only woman here...i'm here or doesnt the
virtual woman count?
oh yes I said you were yes it is true and i think quite important in rethinking the notions of signification
rina says you should be here
it is only a moment
what is only a moment?
a moment is relative
the time it takes to make a photograph
but in that moment something of the object becomes incorporated into the chemical...an interactional exchange
we are not discussing scruton
the photograph of loch ness was a fake
the link is different from a painter
photography has lost its innocencs...
yes I think so
if you can make an imaginative leap to make the truth then it is alot
different to photograph
this thing between the subject and object
photography is either fact or fiction
a photograph is no different to a painting and neither is a fake
we were gullible to believe photography was an actual
neither is a fake if it has real effects - if it makes one angry sad etc or makes one act
paint as near to a philosophy must discover the absolutely
what do you mean by an actual account - any account is as fake or
as real as a photo - its all symbolic ie virtual
conditioned first principle of human knowledge ie the principle on which all knowledge can rest but
philosophy must discover the absolutely unconditioned first principle of human knowledge ie the principle on which all knowledge can rest but which itself rests on nothing "roger"
the camera can only record the bottle
the camera can only record the
you would not be aroused by a pornographic photo because its not real
soon as you change its function it changes its meaning"
you make an imaginative leap when you look at something"
he is not imposing these philosophies"
philosophes
which
we agree on common knowledge
we are still making models to interact with the world"
a nothing would do as well as a something about which nothing can be
said what does this mean?"
i'm not sure i agree...what of the non discursive...that which
is beyond/before language, but never-the-less has real effects
that is not nothing?
it was wittgenstein
and what are the implications of this line of thinking?"
he says if you are think about your thinking, then you must do so in a
publicly intelligible discourse
"true"
to take an object and isolate it is difficult to do the bottle is always in space"
how do we find this public language it has beauty in not being being intelligible?
can anything every be isolated...every knowing is relational..
there must be a principle against which we can know"
isn't public language by its very nature intelligible...otherwise it wouldn't be 'public'...or am i off the track?"
we are talking about the bottle again
you are right and wrong politicians talk intelligibly and but it can be
meaningless
we cant turn a human in to an object
but it is a code and can be decoded we cant turn a human in to an object"
"michael jackson
is decoding postmodern
You say, "is decoding postmodern?
what about indigenous people...we turn them into objects...specimens for our observation...the other is always an object
if we weren't able to decode language there would be no sense...not its not a new bit of postmodern jargon, though postmodernism has perhaps made us more meta-aware of the decoding process
what do you see yourself as
a body-mind working together - the coded and the as yet to be
coded in interaction....the possibility of being and becoming"
thinking and typing at the same time
have you got the paper barb
its that and a whole lot of things at the same time.."
is it important that i have it at this moment?
we sense things"
we perceive things"
i can't possibly think what you might be sensing?
what do you perceive?"
this is four headings on the way we behave"
the appetitive
the cognitive
when you said 'we' sense things, i decoded it as a particular
collective knowledge operating about whether i had read the paper or not... that whole passage was coded and decoded differently by us first you sense and then you perceive
we agree
pro-perception is direct sensing without language - perception always involve language and comes later"
flight fight response
the growth impulse
neither fright nor flight but volition
perception could come before language instinct kicks in what do you mean by volition
learning inquires losing beliefs
All living creatures have a directional flow - they are not pure entropy or chaos - there is some kind of organisation which allows for a volitional but not necessarily cognitive response
what is happening?
someone has found a connection between pollacks painting and fractals
there is no point taking political action
everything you believe in gets corrupted
We crap on the floor and call it crap
How can you subvert something that is always changing
while you are playing the game.
11.3.98 / 18.3.98 / 25.3.98
|
