Theos-Talk Archives (January 1997 Message tl00649)

Tom,

I'd like to make some comments prompted by things you have written to
Richard, with an eye on the recent past as well.

>Illogic is the sure road to superstition.

Then later

>All philosophies begin with premises that cannot be established logically.
>Logic, like a computer, can only work with what it is given.


For all that I believe that logic is but one of the tools we have or can
acquire, I  wish that people (yes, a generalisation) in the TS and outside
of it would apply logic at least half as unflinchingly as you, recent
provocative remarks of mine put in their place. It would make for a *much*
tidier interior house. 

I agree, too that logic can only work with what it is given, these givens
being not just the underlying assumptions in the system, but also very much
the meanings of the words and phrases used, and radiating out in circles of
context and connectedness  - the associations which outside of strictly
logical discourse, color so much people's conceptions when they put words
together, then again when others try to reassemble meaning from them. 

Sometimes, too, as we strive to put "inner" things into words, and we try to
find an orderly way to express them, we may later realise that our
perceptions of the very foundations of the terms we used, have shifted or
expanded. Another "building attempt" to be put aside.

But I do not think it's useless to try and try again to find structures of
words that express a bit more and imprison a bit less. We wouldn't all be on
this list, probably, if that were so. Certainly, I'd like to put behind me
some of the little word-bundles I've put together!


And, to respond to another thing you said:

>As I hope I have made clear by now, I never meant to associate dominance
>with injustice.  It is not possible to want to be treated unfairly.  In
>the social context in which I had been using it recently, no one drew that
>association, but rather saw submission as equal in value to dominance, and
>were only using the desire to be dominated in its consensual form.  If
>most people outside of that social context associate dominance with
>unfairness, my use of the word outside that context was inappropriate to
>express what I meant.

Thank you for that. I'll try not to hassle you on the "D" word again!


>All good things cause dependence.  If Kym succeeds in her goal to
>single-handedly destroy all sexism and the sense of superiority I so
>desperately cling to, I would be left with no emotional support.  I cannot
>allow that. 

You mean you need some emotional support?

With good wishes

Murray