SUO: Re: Code, Re: Cord, Re: Mind, Re: Morse
¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤
Matthew West wrote:
>
> [John Sowa wrote:]
> >
> > [Matthew West wrote;]
> > >
> > > So "giving" is a mediator?
> >
> > Giving involves intentionality, since a mere change of place
> > is not sufficient for to distinguish "giving" from "lending",
> > "returning", "passing along", "delivering", etc.
> >
> > If you saw a picture of "John giving a book to Mary", there
> > would be no visible marks to distinguish it from a picture
> > of any of the other activities: lending, returning, etc.
> >
> > That indicates that giving involves some intention in
> > the mind of one or more participants. A more extreme
> > example is the distinction between killing and murder.
> > A lengthy court trial is often used to find evidence
> > of the underlying intention (and not always with
> > definitive results).
>
> MW: So more generally human intent is
> what sets some action apart as mediating?
>
> Regards
>
> Matthew
¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤
Matthew,
There are circles of philosophy where they reserve the
keyword "action", as distinguished from mere "behavior",
to refer specifically to this genus of "human action".
The writings of Hannah Arendt come to mind. However,
if you, like me, would like to keep physicists within
your circle, there is the rather venerable use of the
word "conduct" -- not to mention "praxis" -- that works
just well for all of the very same uses and towards all
of the very same ends. Going way back, through Brentano,
and at least as far as the Romans, who used the poignantly
telling phrase "mens rea" = "mind to the thing" to describe
a "criminal intent" or a "guilty conscience", it has never
been forgot that "intent" is not just a "thing of the mind"
but, like it says, a "mind to the thing", and thus involves
a relation of one mindful to a so-called "intentional object".
It was only with the recent slicing and dicing of a particular
and very parochial "School Of Analytic Philosophy" (SOAP) that
we temporarily fancied ourselves able to wash our hands of all
good sense, of all sense of good and evil for that matter, and
not to mention the truth of the matter. But that, too, shall
pass away. If you look into it, and I have, you may just find
what others have found, that such a "state of mind" (SOM) just
cannot adequately be represented by anything short of triadic
relations, ones that I personally call "conduct relations",
or else "conduits", for short, which, as it happens, bear
a very close relation to what I call "sign relations".
But you are probably not too surprised to hear that.
With respect to:
| MW: So more generally human intent is what
| sets some action apart as mediating ...
It would be equally true to say that:
| JA: So more generally mediation is what
| sets some action apart as human intent ...
Many Regards,
Jon Awbrey
¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤
Incidental Musements:
http://www.1worldfilms.com/amarcord.htm
http://www.annabelle.net/topics/author.php?firstname=Hannah&lastname=Arendt
¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤