George and Hal: Why does a "question" emerge? Why does it 'imply' to be answered? (I avoid 'why do we feel') Where did 'incompleteness' occur from? All these are very 'human' concepts and we impersonate them into a wider sense. "WE" (as Bruno asked: who is that? and I replied 'humanly thinking machines') still 'think' in our restricted human terms - cannot do otherwise - using that incomplete primitive tool (brain function) which in Self-reflection (consciousness? I hate that term) realizes its own incompleteness and projects it towards the targets of its thinking. So the question itself does not 'emerge': it 'imerges in our thinking. "Something" stands for the unidentified content - a challenge (human that is). And - George - yes, the English language IS broken (as are all other ones, maybe the English - as a mixed artifact - a bit more) because it stands for unclear symbols and their communication with the pretension of clarity. Words are restrictive tools of a restrictive brainfunction. Sorry for the holiday-breaking denigration
John On Jan 19, 2008 8:13 PM, George Levy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hal > > Ok, there is no feeling but there is motivation. There is no feeling of > motivation and there is motivation without feeling. This is totally alien or > the English language is broken. > > > > George > > Hal Ruhl wrote: > Hi George: > > I see no "feeling" of anything in a Something. There is only an absence > of the information needed to answer meaningful questions that are asked and > must is be answered. > > Hal Ruhl > > At 11:13 PM 1/17/2008, you wrote: > > Hal, > Allright. You are saying that incompleteness is the (only) motivator of the > members. In other words the members feel motivated by incompleteness. They > do have the feeling of being incomplete that motivates their behavior. Is > this correct? > George > > Hal Ruhl wrote: > > > Hi George: > > I see no motivator to any dynamics within the Everything other than > the incompleteness of some of its members and the unavoidable > necessity to progressively resolve this incompleteness. > > Hal Ruhl > > At 12:29 AM 1/17/2008, you wrote: > > > > > > Hal Ruhl wrote: > > > > > > This is an automatic process like a mass has to answer to the > forces > [meaningful questions] applied to it. > > > > What in the psyche of the mass makes it answer to the forces? > > George > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
