Obviously the great irony of this is that he gose on at great lengths to explain his understanding of the problem of understanding with little or no problem or consideration for his own analysis Chair, Visual Arts and Technologies The Cleveland Institute of Art
> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 09:22:12 EDT > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: "An 'aesthetic experience' MAKES the work 'art'" > > > In a message dated 7/25/08 8:20:23 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > >> Clintion's testimony concerning Monica Lewinsky >> (sp?) >> > > ! > > . He has said that his concern is ontological. An ontology is-the formal > representations within a domain and the relationships within the domain. I > would > suggest that cheerskep is insisting on defining the individuals of the > domain > before the domain itself has been tentatively defined. He might claim he is > doing this because many of the individuals have different meanings to > different > people and he wants to make sure which one is meant-he is in some other > larger domain using the same individuals,hovering over a vast blurry > field,unable to believe that his companions might only require common sense to > be > understood.. This requirement of defining meaning is functioning as an > evasion > of establishing the domain-evading the question in fact,in a fuzzy cloud of > only wanting to establish clear terms for our own sake. > Kate Sullivan > > > ************** > Get fantasy football with free live scoring. Sign > up for FanHouse Fantasy Football today. > > (http://www.fanhouse.com/fantasyaffair?ncid=aolspr00050000000020) > > -- > This message has been scanned for viruses and > dangerous content by MailScanner, and is > believed to be clean.
