Symbol more meaningful than the event? Is that what you are saying? Sometimes I struggle to follow your writing. Sometimes not. But clarify that please.
Quoting: ammyes, each event (symbol) may or may not in it`s own right have appeared stand alone of scale but to you no matter the scale of each event (symbol) it is the meaning of the symbol in the context of the sequence that you also recognize
it seems to me
what those symbols lead to is within your awareness and maybe not within others, they are not within mine until you tell then i fit them to my symbols to find match, or not
so far all symbols you have shown me of yours match my own differing symbols within the same manifesting living talking picture we are all within
See that ‘feels’ like and algebraic equation to me. Calculus and geometric shape of spiral vortex as it passes over itself never touching the same place twice with your addition of the word ‘differing’. I believe that has something to do with historical dialectic logic. Not the right term.
[
link to www.brocku.ca]
Yes. This is the research methodology I was employing at core back then and still now when describing the spiraling. The brushing up sense.
Some Principles of
Phenomenological Hermeneutics
Copyright 1996 by John Lye. This text may be freely used, with attribution, for non-profit purposes.
As with all of my posts for this course, this document is open to change. If you have any suggestions (additions, qualifications, arguments, corrections), mail me.
1. We live in the world: in history, in concretion: we do not live any where else, and all meaning is only meaning in relation to particular, concrete, historical existence.
2. Our existence as beings includes: our situation; our tools-to-hand with and through which we manipulate and articulate the world; and our fore-understandings of the world.
3. We share reality through common signs. We cannot share anyone else's reality except through the mediation of our symbolic world -- that is, through a 'text' of some sort, which text has a context -- in fact, many contexts. On the other hand, as Gadamer says in Truth and Method, "Thanks to the linguistic nature of all interpretation every interpretation includes the possibility of a relationship with others. There can be no speech that does not bind the speaker and the person spoken to." When one "understands" another, one assimilates what is said to the point that is becomes one's own, lives as much as possible in the person's contexts and symbols.
....
