gib
I have become fixated on part of your post - I look forward to responding to the rest of your post soon.
It would pay off for us to remember this:
- without any of the people that have taken part in this conversation . . .
. . . what chance would remain that the conversation would have went this way -
I say this for a reason that I will leave for now and instead say something else . . .
. . . " something else " . . .
Our minds are at the very least, working on taking in that which is useful to us, and trying to filter out any garbage - garbage is something each individual unconsciously defines, and filters following some conscious thought into what the definition should be - hopefully I wrote that right.
each one of us, is eventually to be wrong about something, inevitable it seems, yet we journey on . . .
. . . searching and finding meaning . . . meaning that is to an extent, also partially predefined by our expectations and/or wants.
You are right on regarding my experiment of interleaving comments to lessen the appearance of a seam, and I think the experiment was worth the trouble. For one it highlights the connections made between interlocutors. It also pointed out the objective flow of the conversation as far as I am aware - and I will say clearly pointed out - to me at least - but I sensed you have picked up on this, hence my happiness in your interpretation of these events.
You: Now, your second post strikes me as an actual response to what I said (you know, in the usual sense of responding to the content).
Me: Indeed you are very correct.
There is a chance that meaning is not atomic but I am hoping you see the beauty in everyone being unique and thinking differently, even when they are being harsh. I am breaking meaning down in an atomic and yet causal way - there is a flow of sorts that of one(usually more) thing leading into another. We are able componentize nearly anything on any scale - we break our own world up, seemingly in an infinite fashion - why not the same with meaning? We do compress meaning a lot - there are many words that we use to do this and yet we still attempt to atomize everything - generally the smallest units that make sense. There should be no doubt by now that meaning is connected to the environment and not just the person and yet there are those who believe different - and why is that do you think? What limits do these mentioned beings place to allow for this kind of belief system(of sorts).
This to me is very well stated - I suspect there is slight disparity, even though I really like what you have written here and I wonder what mechanism will come into play to rectify this disparity - that is what I allow to happen - some call it “go with the flow” but that is not exactly what I am doing as is evident in many of my responses.
This sentence of yours: There are no “atoms” of meaning, in other words, but meaning isn’t indivisible either; leaves me with a lot of food for thought. It is the one sentence that will help me construct meaning for your words that follow:
Somehow, I see here, a doorway to intelligence - I don’t mean your obvious intelligence - I mean as a means to analyse any intelligence.
Hopefully I can find a way, to put what I have last expressed in this post, into better words . . . thinking time . . .