8.17.2005

lakoff i guess, and more!!!

Below is a conversation had between Cristi and I regarding a few things that we thought might be fun to share with you all (you know who you are). Read and enjoy. But not too much. That would be bad.

[Excuse some strange formating here, I'm not responsible. The demons in the blogger machine did it. Those assholes.]

Unsumupable: "we are physical beings, bounded and set off from the rest of the world by the surface of our skins... each of us is a container, witha bounding surface and an in-out orientation. we project our own in-out orientation onto other physical objects that are bounded by surfaces."
DrApathy1: pfffppphhh
Unsumupable: lol
DrApathy1: i haven't met one person that feels they are a container
Unsumupable: hahaha
Unsumupable: the visual field is metaphorized as a container, apparently
Unsumupable: 'the ship is COMING INTO view'
DrApathy1: i don't believe you can frame an argument around such a depersonalized sense of self
DrApathy1: any assessment thereafter is rooted in hypotheticalness
DrApathy1: we cannot experience the world any other way than the way we percieve it
Unsumupable: me neither... and the other thing is that they're assuming we worked out these metaphors from some unknown 'experience'... when really, they're only convenient for communication
DrApathy1: absolutely
DrApathy1: i'mt aking a look at this right now
DrApathy1: http://limetree.ksilem.com/archives/000617.html
Unsumupable: and then we're back to language... which is the only way we can perceive the world outside our won expereince
DrApathy1: but the agruement then becomes is "the world" and "the world through language" the same world or different worlds?
Unsumupable: same world. 'the world' is a metaphor built out of language
Unsumupable: just as the body is
DrApathy1: well...
DrApathy1: we cannot discuss an non-linguistic experience
DrApathy1: because it becomes linguistic the minute we discuss it
DrApathy1: however
DrApathy1: i can say that i have a pure experience
Unsumupable: (this essay is really good, btw)
Unsumupable: you can say that you have a pure experience outside of lanugage?
DrApathy1: yues
Unsumupable: i partially agree
DrApathy1: it's just not discussable
Unsumupable: but i think (at least parts of) our perceptions are structured the same way
DrApathy1: yeah, but there's a primary and a secondary experience of that structuring
Unsumupable: like, we really THINK of another person as a whole entity... we totalize mountains and so on, even when we're just looking at them
DrApathy1: and the secondary experience is just as transparent as the notion of our bodies being containers
Unsumupable: what's the secondary experience?
DrApathy1: we can discuss the law, government etc.
Unsumupable: seeing things as totalities?
Unsumupable: yeah
DrApathy1: but when a cop pulls you over
DrApathy1: the feeling you get is structured by law
DrApathy1: but is itself not rooted in language and is instead an experience of language itself
Unsumupable: hahah
DrApathy1: what're you laughing at?
Unsumupable: the feeling you get when a cop pulls you over... it's a good example
DrApathy1: :-P
Unsumupable: :-)
DrApathy1: i think that the secondary experience is as natural as trees
Unsumupable: how is it not rooted in language, though? i mean, the whole power structure of you and the cop is based on the law, which is a set of linguistic relationships.
DrApathy1: it is rooted in language
DrApathy1: but that's not what the experience is
DrApathy1: we can talk about it as rooted and language
DrApathy1: and the power/law relationship
DrApathy1: but when it's on its own operating the world
DrApathy1: that rooting is secondary, and the factual existence of the cop, the feeling etc. is
DrApathy1: fuck
DrApathy1: i lost the word
DrApathy1: actual?
DrApathy1: direct?
Unsumupable: and indescribable, you'd say?
DrApathy1: maybe
DrApathy1: like
DrApathy1: you said
DrApathy1: we see a person as a...
DrApathy1: let me go back
DrApathy1: as a whole entity
DrApathy1: we can discuss their heart, mind, thoughts, etc.
DrApathy1: but when we meet them, what's contained by them is not there
DrApathy1: or as good as not there
DrApathy1: just as the structures that have made their personality, life outlook, possible
DrApathy1: are not there
DrApathy1: they are there, and they're not really
Unsumupable: yeah, i think i've got you
DrApathy1: and the problem i have with the stuff you've quoted to me
DrApathy1: is it bases it's argument on that stuff being there, which it is, but there is a difference between it being there and BEING there
Unsumupable: hm...
DrApathy1: i think there's a problem when this description of the structure of language stops being description and starts being... having agency
Unsumupable: and you believe it does have agency?
Unsumupable: i sure do.
DrApathy1: well the more is better having the agency of make us want more of things
DrApathy1: no
DrApathy1: i think that's a bunch of bs
Unsumupable: brb
DrApathy1: but yes, language itself does have agency (ie. the cop pulling over example)
DrApathy1: i just don't think we can critique it as though that agency were apparent
DrApathy1: !

2 comments:

Seb (otiosely) said...

My head is spinning.

Cristi said...

ours too, seb. ours too.

Related Posts with Thumbnails