List,
Quasi and not-quasi, perfect and imperfect, genuine and degenerate: I find it boring, and it reminds me of dogmatism and fundamentalism. By saying that it reminds me, I dont mean it as an offence. Rather like proposing the application of Ockham´s razor: Why don´t you try to find a way to av
Supp-supplement: Corrections:
- Eukaryotes, not Prokaryotes.
- Quasi-utterer, Quasi-interpreter versus utterer, interpreter: I don´t know which would be which, but one would be the individual, and the other the whole classification chain.
- Complete individuation: Not possible. Even Obe
Supplement: In the post below you may replace "sign" with "mind" or "piece of mind", depending on which suits where better. I don´t see a necessity to distinguish "mind" from "quasi-mind", so no necessity to say "quasi" at all. I only said "quasi-symbol" to force to distinguish it from the com
List,
I think, that every sign is an argument. Everything that happens aka every sign has a reason, thus contains a "because", which makes it an argument. The quasi-utterer and the quasi-interpreter are each not only the respective individual, but the whole classification chain, such as: (nature(
