Forum Message

Topic: Re:Re:NLP and phenomenology
Posted by: John Schertzer
Date/Time: 13/01/2004 20:31:42

Ryan there you go being Ryan again.  Love it.  I also loved Heidegger for precisely the same reasons you hated Husserl.  To me, if it's philosophy, it's all about nominalizations and generalizations of all sorts, which are like huge high level chunks of categorical rule making by which we sort representations, similar to the way numerical data distributes patterns...

Anyway, I was always surprised and tickled by how people could have conversations on a very nominalized level, and then point to something concrete, and agree that it was what each was talking about.  Kinda funny huh?

How do these things ever coincide?  I sometimes think there's something to the look and feel (not to mention sound) of the nominalization (perhaps a shared hallucinatory synethesia) that made it very specific.  At times. 

There's something very sensory-oriented about language (perhaps the way it maps associatively as a whole) that we're still missing, and that's a point in this discussion of femdemonology as well.


Entire Thread

TopicDate PostedPosted By
NLP and phenomenology19/07/2002 01:23:35Christer Magnusson
     Re:NLP and phenomenology25/07/2002 20:10:30Martin Fry
          NLP and phenomenology28/07/2002 19:40:56Martin Fry
               Re:NLP and phenomenology14/01/2004 17:18:48Juan Arce
          Re:Re:NLP and phenomenology03/08/2002 02:35:03J Rose
     Re:NLP and phenomenology26/07/2002 22:19:56John Grinder
     Re:NLP and phenomenology13/01/2004 13:50:00Juan Arce
          Re:Re:NLP and phenomenology13/01/2004 14:07:27Pete West
     Re:NLP and phenomenology13/01/2004 19:44:33Ryan Nagy
          Re:Re:NLP and phenomenology13/01/2004 19:56:55Lee
          Re:Re:NLP and phenomenology13/01/2004 20:31:42John Schertzer
     help me please02/02/2004 02:54:35hoainam

Forum Home