Nominal9's "method" needs Home
nominal9
I like to go by the screen name "nominal9". I have been either
censored out or otherwise scared off of quite a few internet message
board sites.... CompuServe... AOL... and most recently... Yahoo.
I have a "colored" history.... but I think it is mostly all....
accurate. I have this, sort of, analytical method, that has
application to "courses of action" and events. I originally came up
with it to account for "thematic analysis" of literature.... but it
has all sorts of appleicatyions to most things.... human.
Anyway, here is a link.... if it works ... to the last place that I
was kicked out of.... Yahoo.
And here is a paste of my first entry there on this topic...
****
Here's nominal9's proprietary original quote.... Sort of an
"epistemological statement".
"I have never met a circle or its diameter but Your Ass Resembles
Them. Like it or not, Your Ass Stinks."
Here's the way it works....
A. Something you tell a Realist(Aristotelian?).... I have never met a
circle or its diameter but Your Ass Resembles Them.
B. Something you tell an Idealist(Platonist?).... Like it or not, Your
Ass Stinks.
C. Something you tell a Phenomenologist.... I have never met a circle
or its diameter but Your Ass Resembles Them - and- Like it or not,
Your Ass Stinks.
D. (LOL C.) Something you tell a Nominalist... You can't tell a
Nominalist a friggin' thing.... he's the "Know it All" tryin' to tell
everyone else off.
Can anybody explain this.... do you care to try? Get it right and
y'all get an "Attaboy" from me to you....
nominal9
Hey... nobody's perfect /nominal9
****
I will try to find this Humanities board in a day or two... to see if
I can garner any interest or curiosity in my "stuff". Feel free to
read the rest o my nominal9 entries on the Yahoo site.... if the link
works.. My initial proposal is to transfer the "Snow white"discussion/
analysis to this board and complete it.... I would like to get poor
snow white out of that glass coffin.
nominal9
Sam Carana
nominal9
I'm Italian... how about you?
Thank you for the welcome, I will try to keep it civil, at least until
I get poor Snow White out of her Glass Coffin. I just tried to post
but was mot successful... hope this one takes. Below are my next two
methodological entries from the Yahoo site. I would like to make this
an "interactive" experience with others... if you or anyone else have
any comments... please make them, be it as to the story line or my
interpretations...I will be probably "fixed" as to my "method" but I
like to believe that I can "think" in other ways, also... Here we
go... second try to get this through...
****
I dunno, Guys and Gals....
I'm a little disappointed in youz....
Here's a couple a hints.....
1) What's the difference between Ideas and Matter????
And then,
2)what's the difference between Objective and Subjective????
What happens if you combine all those "terms" together????
What is/are the "universe" of possibilities????
I mean.... it is a little complicated.... but at least there are some
definite options.... (Hint.... which one is your "choice"?)
nominal9
****
Hello CC....
I am "honored" that you want to continue this discussion. I will try
to give you my "take" on this by recalling for you what I have already
"opined" was the difference between "Realists" and Idealists....
*****
A.The Realist gives precedence to Matter (Body) and views Ideas (Mind)
and Matter as being basically the same... They are both Objective
(i.e.,[that is]what Natural Forces, Chaos or Evolution, determines
them to be...
B. The "Idealist" gives precedence to Ideas (Mind) and views Ideas and
Matter (Body) as being basically the same... They are both Subjective
(that is, what he-she wills them to be)...
****
I ASK YOU TO GO LOOK AT what I wrote to "twonickles" in another post
about William of Ockham.... a "Nominalist".... I TRIED TO "PASTE" IT
HERE, BUT IT WAS TOO LONG...
****
To tie the question of definitions together with what I already said
to you above .... I would say that a Nominalist believes in
"subjective" Ideas and in "objective" matter... (A.)That is to say...
like an "Idealist" ... the nominalist recognizes the possibility of
"forms, "concepts" and the like but the Nominalist thinks that they
are only possible "subjectively" (through "WILL") within the mind...
(B.)On the other hand, the nominalist agrees with the the "Realist" in
the "objective" existence of matter... which means that matter rules
itself, apart from the mind, and it is the mind's necessary obligation
to understand the underlying "RULES" which may explain matter.... and
not the other way around.
****
Now.... let's get to the "definition" that you, yourself, CC found for
"Phenomenologist"....
Phenomenologist - A philosophy or method of inquiry based on the
premise that reality consists of objects and events as they are
perceived or understood in human consciousness and not of anything
independent of human consciousness.
****
I can agree with that... but to put it in my own framework.... what
does it mean???? Well , I think, a Phenomenologist also distinguishes
between Ideas and Matter... but with a difference.... a
Phenomenologist "posits" that Ideas are "objective" and that Matter is
"subjective".... The important "aspect" for the phenomenologist is the
"objective" idea of a "subjective" thing that the phenomenalist has in
mind.... the "Thing" (Matter) does not exist in itself... does not
have its own "rules" but is only what the phenomenologist wants it to
be in accordance with the phenomenologists own "objective" ideas of
what it should/could/must be... Totally Ass-backwards... in my own
Nominalist opinion...
You... CC... can be whatever you like.... you can even come up with
something "new" on your own.... Idealists, Realists, Nominalists and
Phenomenologists... of various sorts... have all been around for a
while....
nominal9
On Mar 29, 2:47 am, "Sam Carana" <sam.car...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I do welcome more discussions here, nominal9, just keep in mind there are
> certain terms and conditions, set by Google for all groups:http://groups.google.com/intl/en/googlegroups/terms_of_service3.html
>
> I think it's good if anyone can continue to visit this group and it would be
> a shame if access to a group like this would have to be restricted simply
> because one member persisted with using inappropriate wording.
>
> Cheers!
> Sam Carana
>
> On 3/29/07, nominal9 <nomin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Hello,
> > I like to go by the screen name "nominal9". I have been either
> > censored out or otherwise scared off of quite a few internet message
> > board sites.... CompuServe... AOL... and most recently... Yahoo.
> > I have a "colored" history.... but I think it is mostly all....
> > accurate. I have this, sort of, analytical method, that has
> > application to "courses of action" and events. I originally came up
> > with it to account for "thematic analysis" of literature.... but it
> > has all sorts of appleicatyions to most things.... human.
> > Anyway, here is a link.... if it works ... to the last place that I
> > was kicked out of.... Yahoo.
>
> >http://messages.yahoo.com/Religion_%26_Beliefs/threadview?m=tm&bn=179...
> > nominal9- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Sam Carana
I regard myself as a person who is not bound to a specific place, i.e.
I don't like to be identified with one specific nationalist ideology.
As to concepts like ideas, matter, objective and subjective, they're
all words that may help us communicate and get ideas across.
Yes, I like the idea of being whatever you like to be - sometimes you
hit the walls of reality, though, but then again there are many ways
to get around such walls as well.
Cheers!
Sam Carana
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
nominal9
I include the next entry from yahoo below. It deals with the mideaval
scholastic William of Ockham.... ever heard of him? This gets into the
question of communication that you brought up in your last reply.
Remember.... This is all supposed to be preparatory to a "textual
analysis" of the Snow White story. This all has a bearing on my
NOMINAL9 THEMATIC DIALECTIC LOGIC, which "method"... let's get it out
of the way, up front.... is my original creation and and is registered
copyrighted.... no plagiarism or infringement, please..... Give Credit
Where Credit Is Due... I like to say. This, of course is not meant rto
cast aspersions upon you or on any particular "peruser".... just a
general admonition. Finally, as to your last point, Mr. Carana, I know
what you mean about "Life".... It isn't always a "beach", is it?....
sometimes it's the other word. So, you say that you found "many ways
to get around such walls as well", Mr. Carana? Care to let me in on
one or more of them? Me.... I have not been so fortunate..... Maybe
you should write a thread with your method....
nominal9
Howdy, y'all:
I retrieved that bit about William of Ockham that I wrote to
twonickles, which I mentioned, and pasted it below... just to keep the
context whole.... don't ya know.
****
I ASK YOU TO GO LOOK AT what I wrote to "twonickles" in another post
about William of Ockham.... a "Nominalist".... I TRIED TO "PASTE" IT
HERE, BUT IT WAS TOO LONG...
****
Hello, Twonickles:
No need for apologies... you haven't insulted or offended me.... I
gave your limerick an A... remember? I said in another post here that
my background was in languages and literature... I appreciate your
"creativity"...I couldn't match it, I am certain.
One thing... in your limerick you used the word, "phenomenal" to
describe me.... As a "Nominalist"... Phenomenoloy is the bane of my
existence.... my sworn enemy... my Nemesis. I guess, maybe deep down
in my subconscious, I wondered why you would charge me with being just
the opposite of what I try to be... if you were being purposely
humorous or if you just did't know what some words mean or from whence
they derive their "significance"....
William of Ockham.... Scholasticism, mideaval philosophy, the
rediscovery of Classic Greek philosophy.... Plato and Aritotle... It
is a vast subject area... and I am just a self-taught student in it...
Here's my main "take" on William of Ockham... He came up with a Theory
of Signs... He called them VOX which worked at 2 varying levels...
basically: 1)an "Applied Sign" FIRST LEVEL OF INTENTION and 2)a
"Language Sign" SECOND LEVEL OF INTENTION... At the 1)"Applied Sign"
level Ockham postulated that there existed an "intuitive" (read
empirical) relationship between a conscious mind and a physical
object.... this "Intuitive" interaction between a mind and an object
gave rise to a singular "conceptus" (idea) arising in the mind with
respect to the singular "res" (thing).... Now, though experience....
the conscious mind comes into contact with various "res" (things) many
of which, although they aren't completely (perfectly) alike,
nevertheless they are more or less, similar. This is where the
conscious mind starts a sort of "catalogueing" of similar
"res" (things) and it says, for example... all of those things look
alike.... I will label (NAME) them as "trees".... but wait some of
those "trees" are different among themselves.... I will label (NAME)
them as a subgroup among the general GENUS of trees as the SPECIES
Sycamore...." I think you get the sense of it. Now this is the
2)"Language Sign" SECOND LEVEL OF INTENTION it operates through
"Abstraction" (Ie., not empirical "Intuition") and the conscious mind
just basically "orders" within itself all of its previously gathered
and retained experience through memory. Of course you have to take
into account that with "Language signs"... you also have the
consequence of "communication" between various People (conscious
minds) and that they can then tell and share their individual
experiences with one another.... this leads to an exchange of
information in all sorts of ways... whereby, for example.... I can
"know" what at Oranguta'n is without ever having seem one face to
face... This is the base fundamental of Ockham's contibution to
thought... there is more to it... I have gone into tmore or less the
"Categorematic" side of Ockham's thinking... there was also a
Syncategortematic" side which deal with the more or less "Syntactical"
side of language, very important... but gets somewhat more
complicated.
Sorry if I told you too much at once....
nominal9
Sam Carana
The pessimist may shakle their head in disbelief and sit down in complacency.
The optimist will encourage you to build a boat to reach your destination.
Cheers!
Sam Carana
nominal9
Below are my next two "pertinent" entries from the yahoo site... to
get to the Snow White analysis. I hope the links for the Aristotle
square transfer... if not I will try to add them in later.
To get to your own comments above, though.... I agree about leaving
avenues open to diverse ways of thinking. Let me ask you, have you
sort of understood what I mean by "epistemology" as it relates to the
four overall "philosophical" outlooks I have outlined? It has to do
with how each outlook deals with the difference between Mind and
Matter or Concept and Reference or Idea and Thing... all of which are
roughly the same dichotomy. The two "terms" to consider at the
"epistemological" level .... I would suggest as a staring point... are
SUBJECTIVE and OBJECTIVE. I will let you supply most standard
dictionary definitions for those words. Let me jump ahead and "use"
Aristotle's Square of Logical Opposition to try to diagram what I am
getting at.... The square will not show, I can't draw lines with this
program, but the four sided relationship should be understandable.
Idealist ..................................................................Realist
Mind /
Matter.........................................................Mind /
Matter
subjective/
subjective..............................................objective/
objective
Nominalist..................................................................Phenomenologist
Mind /
Matter...........................................................Mind /
Matter
subjective /
objective...............................................objective /
subjective
I will stop here only because I do not know how many words or
characters each posting can handle.... I would like to continue our
conversation in another post, however, Mr. Carana.
****
Now then... y'all....
Anybody care to "investigate" my own personal theory of "Lies and
Deception"....? It is somewhat complicated, I has to warn yas....
It builds on the whole notion of a distinction between the Applied
Sign Plane and the Language Sign Plane... as thought up by William of
Ockham (I calls him BillyO, sort of affectionately, don't ya know).
What do y'all suppose happens at the Language Sign level to make a Lie
work....?
This is brand new stuff.... never before put on the ol' internet by
either nominal9 or my alterego BillyOdisciple....but only if y'all
asks.... I wouldn't want to bore anyone....
nominal9
Okay, Twonickles and CC....
Here goes... First, I have to specify what happens at the "Applied
Sign Plane"... in order to do that, You have to combine BillyO's
(William of Ockham's) Sign "Triangle" with the Traditional logical
"Square" of Opposition and my own "Circle" of roles.... (problem is I
can't draw diagrams on this board... so y'all will just have to
"imagine" them)
You have seen the Sign "Triangle" above... the distinction between:
Vox (Sign)
Conceptus (Idea) Res (Matter)
The traditional "Square" of logical opposition was originally meant to
deal with "propositions". I include a link to an article that explains
it... some of you (especially 2Nicks[?]) who like propositional logic
(i.e., sylllogisms) may be familiar with it.
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/square... http:/ /plato.stanford.edu/
entries/square/
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/square/
My own "Circle" of roles is my notion of what I consider to be the
Four Possible "personal interests" that a conscious being may have in
relation to any possible course of action.... Those are:
Agent / Patient
Prompter Recipient
1)An "Agent" thinks up or plans or plots a course of action.
2)A "Patient" does "it" or carries the course of action out.
3)A "Recipient" is the person(s) who gets "it" or is affected by the
course of action.
4) A "Prompter" is the person(s) who, although not directly involved
otherwise, is aware of the course of action and intervenes.
Well that's enough for now.... Chew that over for a while. If y'all
want to continue... try to think how BillyO's Sign Triangle can be
used to "signify" the "Plan" and "Action" part of any given "Course of
Action". Then... try to think how the BillyO's sign "Triangles" can be
disposed in the traditional "Square" of logical Opposition.... If it
interests y'all, of course.
nominal9
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
nominal9
not show up right and it could be misleading.... let me try to correct
it here, first
On Mar 31, 2:06 pm, "nominal9" <nomin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hello, Mr. Carana....
> Below are my next two "pertinent" entries from the yahoo site... to
> get to the Snow White analysis. I hope the links for the Aristotle
> square transfer... if not I will try to add them in later.
> To get to your own comments above, though.... I agree about leaving
> avenues open to diverse ways of thinking. Let me ask you, have you
> sort of understood what I mean by "epistemology" as it relates to the
> four overall "philosophical" outlooks I have outlined? It has to do
> with how each outlook deals with the difference between Mind and
> Matter or Concept and Reference or Idea and Thing... all of which are
> roughly the same dichotomy. The two "terms" to consider at the
> "epistemological" level .... I would suggest as a staring point... are
> SUBJECTIVE and OBJECTIVE. I will let you supply most standard
> dictionary definitions for those words. Let me jump ahead and "use"
> Aristotle's Square of Logical Opposition to try to diagram what I am
> getting at.... The square will not show, I can't draw lines with this
> program, but the four sided relationship should be understandable.
>
> Idealist ....................................................Realist
> Mind /> Matter........................................Mind / Matter
> subjective/ subjective..........................objective/ objective
>
> Nominalist...........................................Phenomenologist
> Mind / Matter.........................................Mind / Matter
subjective / objective.................................objective /
subjective
> I will stop here only because I do not know how many words or
> characters each posting can handle.... I would like to continue our
> conversation in another post, however, Mr. Carana.
So.... What I am trying to say is that :
1) for the Idealist both Mind and Matter are subjective
2) for the Realist both Mind and Matter are objective
3) for the Nominalist Mind is subjective but Matter is objective
4) for the Phenomenologist Mind is objective but Matter is
subjective....
nominal9
> Nominalist..................................................................Phenomenologist
> (i.e., sylllogisms) may be familiar with it.http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/square... http:/ /plato.stanford.edu/
nominal9
the first "show quoted text" tab to see it....or just scroll down here
to the last entry... Anyway... here are my next entries as to
"method".... dealing with Ockham's "triangle" and how they can be
placed in Aristotle's "square"..... By the way.... please notice that
this is my own "innovation". In traditional "Aristotelian" and
"Scholastic" logic... Aristotle's logical "square" is used only to
treat the question of "particular" as compared to "universal"
statements .... which gives rise to "Syllogism" logic. Please
notice.... this is my "creation".... I bypass the "syllogism" stage
and place what I call Applied Signs within the logical square. These
Applied Signs, correspond roughly to Ockham's Signs of First
Intention.... in that they are either actual physical (intuited)
things or instated (motivated) courses of action. This should become
clearer as I go on..... maybe.... that's up to the peruser....
Hello twonickles,
Ok Nominal, I'm now throughly confused. Although I understand your
circle of roles, I can't seem to visualize what you're saying here:
>>You have seen the Sign "Triangle" above... the distinction between:
.........................Vox (Sign).........................
Conceptus (Idea).......................... Res (Matter)....
Deos my addition of the dots help you visualize the "Triangle", as a
diagram?
If you have difficulty with "how" or "what" a Vox(sign)
"signifies"...... here's a very rough sample....
...........................Apple..........................
Sustenance...............................Red,Round,Fruit....
Of course.... the concept and the reference side of the Sign "Apple"
varies from one "individual" (variety) to another and also on the
ammount of information that you want to supply on both sides.... talk
to a farmer or to a biologist about "apples" and you may learn a lot
more than you care to know....
nominal9
Twonickles & CC, et al (if you are still around)....
before I get to your latest question of the tie in to my "circle" of
roles.... I want you to consider how BillyO's "triangles" can be
disposed in the "square" of opposition.... remember?
****
Well that's enough for now.... Chew that over for a while. If y'all
want to continue... try to think how BillyO's Sign Triangle can be
used to "signify" the "Plan" and "Action" part of any given "Course of
Action". Then... try to think how the BillyO's sign "Triangles" can be
disposed in the traditional "Square" of logical Opposition.... If it
interests y'all, of course.
nominal9
****
Let's start with the "Sign" APPLE (since that's the one I happened to
use as an example). I said that the sign APPLE could be thought of as
the following "Triangle":
..................Apple.................
Sustenance................... Red, Round, Fruit
Now... here's a chance (?) complication.... what do y'all know about
Apple Seeds? Here are two links that explain what I'm getting at...
http://www.hsus.org/pets/pet_care/protec...
http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/ge...
So... it would appear that APPLE SEEDS, to the contrary, have the
following "triangle":
...............Apple Seed........
Poison.........................Small, Brown, Pit
So.... If you dispose the Possible "sign aspects" in the logical
"square".... you come up with something like the following: (Concept-
based Disposition... notice)
Sustenance/Fruit.....................Poison/Pit
Sustenance/ Pit......................Poison/Fruit
(Whatta y'all think?.... Pretty neat, Huh????)
Now, if y'all want to continue this.... Lemme know.
nominal9
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
nominal9
I have been on another board for a couple of days, so I have let this
slide.... Sorry, to any who may have been interested. Anyway, I have
included two more entries, below.... My initial "methodological"
introduction is fairly complete.... there is more "method" involved
but it is best.... demonstrated... not just talked about. So, I will
get started with the textual analysis of the Grimm version of the Snow
White tale... I hope the "link" to the story works. Take a few minutes
to read or re-familiarize yourselves with it.... I used the latest
translation available on that site.
nominal9
{Corrected} PS.... Twonickles, CC, et al....
Consider the question of "Value Judgments"... call them "Self-
Interest"... if tyou do not want to get to callin' em' "Moral or
Ethical" jus' yet..... I call it "assigned(moral or ethical)
predicated values.
****
So.... If you dispose the Possible "sign aspects" in the logical
"square".... you come up with something like the following: (Concept-
based Disposition... notice)
Sustenance/Fruit.....................Poison/Pit
[Good] [Good]...................... [Bad] [Bad]
Sustenance/ Pit......................Poison/Fruit
[Good] [Bad] ........................[Bad] [Good]
(Whatta y'all think?.... Pretty neat, Huh????)
Now, if y'all want to continue this.... Lemme know.
nominal9
(THERE'S NO SPELL CHECK ON MY SET-UP. I USUALLY JUST LET THINGS SLIDE,
BUT I DIDN'T WANT TO CAUSE "CONFUSION")
Howdy twonickles, CC, & Y'all.... I found an on-line text of the Snow-
White story... I include the "link" below... hope I copied it right...
http://www.pitt.edu/~dash/grimm053.html
It is the "Grimm" version and looks to be pretty good as a definitive
version.
Anyway... the story is more involved than may appear at first, for a
children's tale, and it is rather "grown up" un some regards. The
appear to be four "deceptions" to deal with.... 1) the huntsman's
"Kill Snow-white" deception... 2)the wicked queen"s "Lace bodice"
deception.... 3) the wicked queen's "Comb" deception.... 4 the wicked
queen's "Apple" deception. Then there's the overall plot to deal
with... So, I guess the placeto begin is to start with the plot...
characters and actions.... Here's one consideration that I take for
granted... if you haven't noticed.... in the "inanimate" world you
have to accout for "Cause and Effect" but in the "animate" world you
also have to account for "Action and Reaction" this is where my so-
called "circle of roles" comes into play.... not to even mention the
whole apparatus that is involved with "communication" and the language
sign plane... But I will get into that, too if y'all like... Anyway,
if the link works, you may care to review the story.... it's a short
read. First question.... so why exactly did the wicked queen want to
kill Snow White.... what was her "motivation" and was the "Good" or
"Bad"?.... Put it in a "square", if you can...
nominal9
> Apple Seeds? Here are two links that explain what I'm getting at...http://www.hsus.org/pets/pet_care/protec...
Sam Carana
nominal9
Below are my next two entries... getting into the textual analysis of
the Snow White tale. I am leaving out the comments made in the Yahoo
thread by the other posters, not necessarily out of disrespect to
them, but just so as to maintain their own privacy or other rights....
By the way, Mr. Carana, I did try to post on the Epistemology board,
as you suggested.... I will go back to see if the message went
through, in a while. It looks interesting, and appears to have an
"international" flavor... it could be a lot of fun, thanks.
nominal9
Hello twonickles, CC & Y'all.... 2nicks (if I may presume to call you
that) I am impressed with your analysis.... but I do not agree with it
very much....
http://www.pitt.edu/~dash/grimm053.html
The queen.... the text says....
"A year later the king took himself another wife. She was a beautiful
woman, but she was proud and arrogant, and she could not stand it if
anyone might surpass her in beauty. She had a magic mirror. Every
morning she stood before it, looked at herself, and said:
Mirror, mirror, on the wall,
Who in this land is fairest of all?"
Two "thematic dialectics" jump out at me.... the "Pride or Arrogance"
dialectic and the "Rivalry" dialectic... "squared" they would appear
as follows:
(Queen).......................(Snow White)
Arrogance / display.......... humility / downplay
Pride /vaunt..................modesty/demur
BAD / BAD.....................GOOD / GOOD
Arrogance /downplay...........humility /display
Pride / demur.................modesty / vaunt
BAD / GOOD....................GOOD / BAD
Now, if you ask me where I get all these "words, from the text when
all you see is "proud and arrogant" above, the answer is that other
parts of the text also fill some of them in but (more to the point) to
most "readers" in the given "culture" they are there by "implication".
(Queen)..................(Snow White)
Rivalry / Compete........Friendship/ cooperate
BAD / BAD................GOOD / GOOD
Rivalry / cooperate......Friendship / compete
BAD / GOOD...............GOOD / BAD
So, I suppose that we agree, so far, that the queen is BAD and Snow
White is GOOD. But those "predicated (moral or ethical)value
judgments" are based of "qualities" and "actions"....in my analysis.
To go on... all goes well until the queen gets the following reply
from the mirror:
"You, my queen, are fair; it is true.
But Snow-White is a thousand times fairer than you.
The queen took fright and turned yellow and green with envy. From that
hour on whenever she looked at Snow-White her heart turned over inside
her body, so great was her hatred for the girl. The envy and pride
grew ever greater, like a weed in her heart, until she had no peace
day and night."
This part of the story introduces (at least) two more "thematic
dialectics" when it uses the words "envy" and "hatred".... here's how
I "square" them:
(Queen).....................(Snow White)
Envy / replace.............Admiration / emulate
------(supplant)-------------------------(join)
BAD / BAD..................GOOD / GOOD
Envy / emulate.............Admiration / replace
-------(join)--------------------------(supplant)
BAD / GOOD.................GOOD / BAD
****
(Queen).....................(Guess Who????)
Hate / revenge.............Indignation / avenge
BAD / BAD..................GOOD /GOOD
Hate / avenge..............Indignation / revenge
BAD / GOOD.................GOOD /BAD
I will end this post here, for length.... I will try to post another
below.
nominal9
Hello twonickles, CC & Y'all.... 2nicks, here we go.... the plot
starts to get into "actions and reactions".The text below regards the
huntsman's part.
Then she summoned a huntsman and said to him, "Take Snow-White out
into the woods. I never want to see her again. Kill her, and as proof
that she is dead bring her lungs and her liver back to me."
The huntsman obeyed and took Snow-White into the woods. He took out
his hunting knife and was about to stab it into her innocent heart
when she began to cry, saying, "Oh, dear huntsman, let me live. I will
run into the wild woods and never come back."
Because she was so beautiful the huntsman took pity on her, and he
said, "Run away, you poor child."
He thought, "The wild animals will soon devour you anyway," but still
it was as if a stone had fallen from his heart, for he would not have
to kill her.
Just then a young boar came running by. He killed it, cut out its
lungs and liver, and took them back to the queen as proof of Snow-
White's death. The cook had to boil them with salt, and the wicked
woman ate them, supposing that she had eaten Snow-White's lungs and
liver.
The request made by the quuen suggests a "course of action" that
involves at least a few "thematic dialectics".... one is to "take"
Snow White to the woods.... another is to "kill" Snow White.... lemme
"square" 'em for ya...
(Queen / huntsman)............(Snow White / huntsman)
Dominate / imprison...........Emancipate / let go
BAD / BAD.....................GOOD / GOOD
Dominate / let go.............Emancipate / imprison
BAD /GOOD ....................GOOD /BAD
****
Now.... let me ask y'all... wwhat's the difference between, let's say,
"Murder"(BAD) and "Retribution"(GOOD)... or between an "Act of
War"(GOOD) and a "War Crime"(BAD)"? Here's my next "thematic
dialectic"
(Murder & War Crime)
(Queen/huntsman)
Malice / kill innocent............Defense / kill guilty
----------------------------------(Justice)-------------
BAD / BAD.........................GOOD /GOOD
Malice / kill guilty..............Defense / kill innocent
----------------------------------(Justice)-------------
BAD /GOOD.........................GOOD / BAD
Here it comes..... are you ready????.... As "agent", the queen
"planned" a "course of action" to be carried out, as "patient" by the
huntsman whereby he would.... first, Dominate/imprison .... and
second, Malice/kill innocent.... both regarding the "prospective"
"recipient" Snow White.... both of these courses of action were
totally BAD. However, the "prospective" "recipient", Snow White, spoke
on her own behalf and suggested an alternative course of action to the
huntsman whereby the huntsman would, instead Emancipate/ let go Snow
White and, since she was NOT GUILTY, refrain from either "murdering"
her or exacting "retribution" which was, unwarranted.
FAR FROM BEING AMORAL.... THE HUNTSMAN WAS MORALLY GOOD THROUGH AND
THROUGH,UP TO HERE, ESPECIALLY CONSIDERING THAT HE POSSIBLY KNEW ABOUT
THE TRUTH-TELLING MAGIC MIRROR....
Catcha later 2nicks & y'all.
nominal9
On Apr 4, 1:50 am, "Sam Carana" <sam.car...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Nominal,
> have you also had a look at the epistemology group here at Google, at:http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology
> episte...@googlegroups.com
>
> Cheers!
> Sam Carana
>
Sam Carana
nominal9
but
> wouldn't the huntsman have had more guts if he told the queen that killing
> innocent girls was a bad idea. Of course, the huntsman would most
> likely have been punished, even killed for such comments, but one can also
> question the morality of being a huntsman in the first place. Wouldn't
> it reflect even higher moral standards if this man had chosen
> another occupation?
>
Ah yes.... very good points, Mr. Sam Carana. Maybe I will get to some
of them before the end of the analysis of the tale. However, the tale
is what it is..... it "could' have been different... but then it
"would" not have been the Grimm Snow White.
As to chosing another occupation.... consider the historical setting
of the tale.... what should the huntsman have been, instead.... a
starving Serf???? There is something to be said for a lifetime of
hunting for game.... nowadays quite a few men can't wait for deer
season.... or they spend all sorts of "recreational" money to go on
hunting or fishing excurions to Alaska or even Africa... etc. Then
there's the "social" issue... as you said, we have a lowly "huntsman"
challenging the authority of a "queen" ... a commoner versus a top-
order royal. I dunno.... everything considered, I think the huntsman
did alright for himself. Below are my next few entries in the
analysis of the tale.... But keep this issue of the "morality" of the
huntsman open in your mind.... there may well be complications.
****
Hello twonickles, CC & y'all.... I was afraid I was running out of
room above so I stopped before getting to the huntsman's deception....
I will pick up there tomorrow.... If I don't have other commitments to
attend to.... Anyway, what do y'all think of my "circle of roles"
part.... and anything else I have said so far????
nominal9
Hello twonickles, Woman Power.... to use a slightly "incendiary"
phrase.... The lack of Woman Power in a male "dominated" society,
eh????.... Just joking, it is a valid and serious social equality
question. I appreciate and can agree with the direction of your cited
article.... that (some) women see beauty as a means to garner power
over powerful men and thereby "get some of their own".... that may
(more likely than not) well have been the "wicked queen"'s way. Of
course, the question is, "in a perfect world", should women have to
stoop to such "wiles"... should they not be taken and judged on the
basis of their own merits.... intellectual or otherwise? I think you
would say, in a "moral" sense, yes.
But I want to treat this issue of power as it "may" relate to the
story....You may recall that the queen "summoned" the huntsman and
pretty much "told" him what to do to Snow White. The queen was in a
position of "authority" over the huntsman.... what do you suppose his
"status" was.... more than a plain "subject", I would think....
probably more like a Castle "officer" who was charged with
participating in the hunts for game that may have served as either (or
both) a pastime for the nobility or a means to stock up the castle
larder with meat. So, when the queen told the hutsman to take Snow
White and kill her.... well, I would think that the hutsman was
"expected" to do it.... The relationship between them consisted of the
queen's Authority( GOOD concept)/ to summon and command (GOOD
reference) and the huntsman's Subordination (GOOD concept)/ to obey
(GOOD reference). But what happens when the queen's moral compass
points in the wrong direction?.... Then instead you get something like
the queen's Tyranny (BAD concept)/ to compel (BAD reference) and the
huntsman's Subjugation (BAD concept)/ to submit (BAD reference).Now.
you can mix and match those "Applied Signs" in various ways, depending
on if you want to logically "square them according to the single
individual (queen "or" huntsman) or to the paired relationship (queen
"and" huntsman)
(queen)
authority / order.............. tyranny / compel
GOOD / GOOD.....................BAD/BAD
authority / compel..............tyranny / order
BAD/ GOOD.......................BAD / BAD
****
(huntsman)
subordination / obey............subjugation / submit
GOOD / GOOD.....................BAD / BAD
subordination / submit..........subjugation / obey
GOOD / GOOD.....................BAD / GOOD
****
I want to get across the notion that there are two ways of
doing(REFERENCE) the (almost) same thing and there are two ways of
thinking(CONCEPT) about the (almost) same plan. The difference is in
the details... details like, in this case, Snow White's "innocence".
So, what happens in the story?....Here's what I think.... the huntsman
was faced with a moral dilemma.... an "unethical" order from a
"superior Officer" what should he have done???? here's my next "mixed"
dialectic.....
independence / rebel.......... servitude / acquiesce
(?) / (?)......................(?) / (?)
independence / acquiesce.......servitude / rebel
(?) / (?)......................(?) /(?)
We saw that the huntsman asserted his independence and rebelled....but
he was still a subordinate or a subjugate to the queen.... what could
he do? face the consequences? would he be punished? then? or
nowadays?.... he chose to try to deceive the queen..... how did he do
it and was that moral or ethical?
nominal9
Howdy twonickles, CC(?) & Y'all... I want to try to finish up with the
huntsman's part in the Snow White tale...
http://www.pitt.edu/~dash/grimm053.html
Remember the text....
"Then she summoned a huntsman and said to him, "Take Snow-White out
into the woods. I never want to see her again. Kill her, and as proof
that she is dead bring her lungs and her liver back to me."
The huntsman obeyed and took Snow-White into the woods. He took out
his hunting knife and was about to stab it into her innocent heart
when she began to cry, saying, "Oh, dear huntsman, let me live. I will
run into the wild woods and never come back."
Because she was so beautiful the huntsman took pity on her, and he
said, "Run away, you poor child.""....
A lot of this has already ben accounted for. Now,I want to deal with
another Applied sign and related thematic dialectic.... the huntsman's
"pity or compassion" for Snow White.... here's the way I see it.... an
interplay between the following concepts (or feelings) and references
(or actions):
Pity or / Sighs and.................Disdain / Scorn
Compassion / Tears
GOOD / GOOD............................BAD / BAD
Pity or / Scorn.....................Disdain / Sighs and
Compassion.......................................Tears
GOOD / BAD..............................BAD / GOOD
So, in the text we see that Snow White's "crying" made the huntsman
"take pity" on her and he did not "disdain or scorn her and proceed to
kill her.... a related thematic dialectic is the following....
Sympathy / give aid....................Apathy / Kill or
.............................................. do nothing
GOOD / GOOD............................BAD /BAD
Sympathy / Kill or ....................Apathy / give aid
GOOD / BAD.............................BAD /GOOD
So, here again, the huntsman goes from a totally BAD course of action
to a totally GOOD course of action with regard to Snow White.
(continued)
nominal9
****
I will stop here for today.... next time we get to the huntsman's
deception. Mr. Carana, I hope the above addresses... even if it does
not replies completely... some of your own questions as to the
strength of morals exhibited by the hunstman...Do you care to make any
further comments in this regard, in light of what I set forward, does
it mitigate things in your mind? You do not have to agree with me, if
you have another opinion.... let's discuss it.
nominal9
On Apr 4, 9:56 pm, "Sam Carana" <sam.car...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yes, the story pictures the huntman as good for letting Snow White go, but
> wouldn't the huntsman have had more guts if he told the queen that killing
> innocent girls was a bad idea. Of course, the huntsman would most
> likely have been punished, even killed for such comments, but one can also
> question the morality of being a huntsman in the first place. Wouldn't
> it reflect even higher moral standards if this man had chosen
> another occupation?
>
> Cheers!
> Sam Carana
>
Sam Carana
Had he truly changed, he would have tried to get away from the queen.
nominal9
I include three entires from the yahoo site.... I want to get them
here, quickly, just in case they, "disappear".... If you have any
comments.... please feel free.
nominal9
****
Hello twonickles CC & Y'all This is the huntsman's part continued....
"He thought, "The wild animals will soon devour you anyway," but still
it was as if a stone had fallen from his heart, for he would not have
to kill her.
Just then a young boar came running by. He killed it, cut out its
lungs and liver, and took them back to the queen as proof of Snow-
White's death. The cook had to boil them with salt, and the wicked
woman ate them, supposing that she had eaten Snow-White's lungs and
liver."
Let's get to the deception.... clearly the huntsman killed a boar, cut
out its lungs and liver and took them to the queen, as proof of Snow
White's death....
The "fact" is that the hutsman "really" gave the queen a "boar" that
he had "hunted" (Applied sign) as the so-called proof.... but he
"concealed" this "fact" and "communicated" to the queen that the
remains were those of Snow White this was the communicated Language
sign.... so what did the huntsman do to "lie".... he [completely]
"concealed" the factual identity of the boar... So, what's the
difference between a boar and a Snow White, you might ask???? Here's
one way to look at it....
intellect/ human body.........simple sensation/pig body
or soul
(?) /(?).......................(?) /(?)
intellect/ pig body...........simple sensation/human body
or soul
(?) /(?).......................(?) /(?)
I left the assigned moral or ethical predicated values as question
marks to show that those value judgements depend on the individual
person or pig in question.... that's a joke....(maybe).
But there are other thematic dialectics at play here.... was the
huntsman doing a GOOD thing in killing the boar? Was the queen doing a
GOOD or BAD thing in (mistaken belief) eating Snow White's flesh????
Is that any way to give a funeral???? for the answers to these
questions and more.... tune in tomorrow....(maybe).
nominal9
Hello twonickles CC & Y'all This is the huntsman's part
continued....SOME MORE.
"He thought, "The wild animals will soon devour you anyway," but still
it was as if a stone had fallen from his heart, for he would not have
to kill her.
Just then a young boar came running by. He killed it, cut out its
lungs and liver, and took them back to the queen as proof of Snow-
White's death. The cook had to boil them with salt, and the wicked
woman ate them, supposing that she had eaten Snow-White's lungs and
liver."....
But there are other thematic dialectics at play here.... was the
huntsman doing a GOOD thing in killing the boar? Was the queen doing a
GOOD or BAD thing in (mistaken belief) eating Snow White's flesh????
Is that any way to give a funeral???? for the answers to these
questions and more.... tune in tomorrow....(maybe)."
I want to leave the huntsman's "Boar" deception alone for a bit (I've
explained a lot elsewhere, already).... I may get back to it again,
though. Now I want to consider those other "thematic dialectics I was
talking about. From the story text we notice that... wild animals
devour "people".... and people devour wild animals..... as food. There
is a "cultural" tabooo in "most" places and societies against people
eating people. It follows that -hunting animals for food - is GOOD but
(head) hunting people for food is BAD.... if the "agent/patient" is a
"person"... But, on the other hand, if the "agent/patient" is an
animal.... then it is all GOOD. It may be said that any person who
eats people for food is no better that an animal in their own right...
remember the prior thematic dialectic?...figuratively, such a person
would be considered a lesser "brute" animal, without intellect or
soul. So, FROM THE STANDPOINT OF PEOPLE.... the following thematic
dialectic applies (even in the cultural and societal context of the
Snow White story).
human / eat lesser animals ......animal / eat all animals
sustenance........................sustenance............
GOOD /GOOD........................BAD / BAD
human / eat all animals.........animal/ eat lesser animals
sustenance......................sustenance..............
GOOD / BAD.......................BAD / BAD
Therefore, from this standpoint, the queen's course of action of
eating the lungs and liver of Snow White (although she was duped into
a mistaken belief) was totally morally wrong.Of course... I think it
was a totally GOOD thing for the huntsman to kill the boar... killing
animals for food (sustenance) is alright in "most" people's and
societies' "book".... Some may question the worthiness of killing for
"trophy" or for sport.... but that doesn't come up in this context so
I will let that slide... I will leave it to the "reader's personal
discretion"....
But still, there could be more to consider in this situation....
Cannibalism, other than for "food", why do "some" people consider it
FROM THEIR CONTRARY POINT OF VIEW OF MORAL OR ETHICAL PREDICATED
VALUES a "GOOD" thing to eat human flesh???? And could any of those
other motivated courses of action apply in the story case of the
queen?
(Continued)
Howdy, y'all .... (continued) more to consider in this situation....
Cannibalism, other than for "food", why do "some" people consider it
FROM THEIR CONTRARY POINT OF VIEW OF MORAL OR ETHICAL PREDICATED
VALUES a "GOOD" thing to eat human flesh???? And could any of those
other motivated courses of action apply in the story case of the
queen?
I want to just get started on the notion of "magic" as it may relate
to this story.... in some cultures and times magic plays a part in the
belief systems of characters. One "principle" in magic is called
"Homeopathy"... whereby, if you take into your body some part of a
thing... you thereby "automatically" acquire some control over or some
attribute or quality of the thing....
http://www.bartleby.com/196/123.html
Look at the link above for an "anthropological" explanation of this.
Now, "homeopathy" also has other applications such as "homeopathic"
medicines and such.... I am not commenting or judging those other
applications here.... I just want to treat the notion of "homeopathic
magic" as it relates to "cannibalism".... can y'all come up with a
Thematic dialectic that "contraposes" the posssible "rationalized"
queen's (supposed) course of of action? Here's the (supposed) sign
"Triangle" I propose....
.............Cannibalism.............
Homeopathy Magic / eat human flesh
acquire attributes/ become beautiful
Now, don't make me do all the work.... y'all... try this one out on
your own, please.....
Go ahead... try fillin' in the logical "square" by "implication"....
think "opposites"....
Catch y'all another day.... by the way.... also think about
contrasting the sort of "funeral that Snow White would have gotten in
the quee's "stomach" as compared to the funeral Snow White received
from the Dwarfs later on in the storu.... Glass Coffin and all....
Total context, remember?.... It all ties in and fits in. There's a
Thematic dialectic there, too...
so long, CC, twonickles( hope the best for you and yours)... & the
rest of YOUS interlopin' "voyeurs"....
nominal9
Howdy y'all.... I haven't gotten any reply to my last Snow White
post....Don't know if I lost CC, or not.... she may be just passively
watching, like she said.... That's okay, at least she has the good
maners to show herself....
As for the rest of my "Stealth Audience"....lemme repeat, "give credit
where credit is due... do your own stuff.... don't be PLAGIARIZIN'
POPINJAY PARROTS".... now y'all know who y'all are.... don't make me
name names....
I am going to leave that "magical" "Cannibalism" thematic dialectic
unfinished.... like I said, y'all figure it out (Me,I know how it
works).
I want to cary on with the story.... next part, below
http://www.pitt.edu/~dash/grimm053.html
"But the seventh one, looking at his bed, found Snow-White lying there
asleep. The seven dwarfs all came running up, and they cried out with
amazement. They fetched their seven candles and shone the light on
Snow-White. "Oh good heaven! Oh good heaven!" they cried. "This child
is so beautiful!"
They were so happy, that they did not wake her up, but let her
continue to sleep there in the bed. The seventh dwarf had to sleep
with his companions, one hour with each one, and then the night was
done.
The next morning Snow-White woke up, and when she saw the seven dwarfs
she was frightened. But they were friendly and asked, "What is your
name?"
"My name is Snow-White," she answered.
"How did you find your way to our house?" the dwarfs asked further.
Then she told them that her stepmother had tried to kill her, that the
huntsman had spared her life, and that she had run the entire day,
finally coming to their house."
Now, I skipped a lot of the "narrative" but the main story plot is all
contained above... see(?),Snow White explains the whole thing to the
dwarfs.....
"Then she told them that her stepmother had tried to kill her, that
the huntsman had spared her life, and that she had run the entire day,
finally coming to their house."....
First... I want to look at the "reception" that Snow White got from
the dwarfs....
They fetched their seven candles and shone the light on Snow-White.
"Oh good heaven! Oh good heaven!" they cried. "This child is so
beautiful!"
They were so happy, that they did not wake her up, but let her
continue to sleep there in the bed.".....
Contrast the "reception" that Snow White's beauty got from the dwarfs
with the one that the reader has noted that she got from the queen and
it isn't a stretch to be able to "explicitly" fill in the two opposing
"sign" poles of an already noted Thematic dialectic....
(Dwarfs).......................(Queen)
admiration / emulate.............envy / supplant
.............join.......................replace....
GOOD / GOOD...................BAD / BAD
admiration / supplant.........envy / emulate
.............replace.................join.....
GOOD / BAD....................BAD / BAD
So, it follows that the Dwarfs were.... to quote the text...."But they
were friendly and asked, "What is your name?"".... FRIENDLY.... it
says... Another pole of a noted Thematic dialectic is made "explicit"
textually, here...
(Dwarfs)........................(Queen)
Friendship / cooperate..........Rivalry / compete
GOOD / GOOD.....................BAD / BAD
Friedship / compete.............Rivalry / cooperate
GOOD / BAD .....................BAD / GOOD
I am concerned about length.... I will continue this on another
post.... if y'all are still with me and "interested"
nominal9
On Apr 5, 1:48 pm, "nominal9" <nomin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Yes, the story pictures the huntman as good for letting Snow White go,
> but> wouldn't the huntsman have had more guts if he told the queen that killing
> > innocent girls was a bad idea. Of course, the huntsman would most
> > likely have been punished, even killed for such comments, but one can also
> > question the morality of being a huntsman in the first place. Wouldn't
> > it reflect even higher moral standards if this man had chosen
> > another occupation?
>
> huntsman's part in the Snow White tale...http://www.pitt.edu/~dash/grimm053.html
nominal9
I would like to reply to your own post on another day, if you don't
mind.... this is a busy weekend. If I may presume, whatever holidays
that you may celebrate at this time, if any, I wish you the best.
nominal9
nominal9
Hello, Sam Carana and any other viewers.....
more methodology... Here we start getting into the "languuage sign
plane" and the mechanisms of deception. Remember? the huntsman lied
to the queen.... he told her he had killed Snow White, but instead he
actually killed a boar... Well, here's how I think that deception is
"communicated"...
nominal9
Hello twonickles, CC & Y'all.... Thinking caps on? Time for some
more...."diagrams"....
To recap I have said AT THE APPLIED SIGN PLANE you have to combine
Ockhams "Triangle" of categorematic signs with Aristotle's logical
"Square" of opposition and my own "circle" of any given person(s)'s
roles in order to understand how "events" and "courses of action"
happen and are assigned "moral or ethical predicated value judgments"
in stories.... (and, I suggest, in actual real life instances,
too)....
Now.... it's time to put it into high gear... because now I also want
to "suggest" a framework to deal with LANGUAGE SIGN PLANE... and here
things get "ratcheted up a notch" in the area of complication.... Are
y'all ready for this????
At the LANGUAGE SIGN PLANE.... you have to account for "ONTOLOGY"....
i.e., Fact as opposed to Fiction.... and here you need "Three
dimensional" diagrams... not just simple "Two dimensional"
diagrams.... Here you need (....TA DA....) Pyramids.... Cubes.... and
Spheres (....OH MY....).
Let's take the huntsman's deception as a starting point. We said that
he had two APLLIED SIGNS to start his deception with.... one was "Snow
White" and the other a "Boar"... these two "triangles" of Applied
Signs were as follows:
.......Snow White..........( versus) .......Boar....
intellect / human body................simple / pig body
soul..................................sensation........
GOOD /GOOD............................BAD /BAD
(For the Language sign we add the Pyramid bases, watch)
FACT / FACT..........................FACT / FACT
MANIFEST / MANIFEST..................CONCEAL / CONCEAL
(the results are the "communicated" language signs)
.........Snow White....... (versus).... Snow White....
this is the truth.....................this is a lie...
Get the "picture"???? Applied sign at the Apex... Four part
"ontological" Language sign at the base.... PYRAMID.
(CONTINUE WITH "CUBE".... IF Y'ALL DARE)
nominal9
CONTINUE WITH "CUBE".... IF Y'ALL DARE)....
So, here's what I suggest..... there are four separate "Language sign
concepts"... and there are four separate "Language sign references"
for a combined total possible variation of "sixteen Language Signs"...
The four Language sign concepts are.... (W.) FACT vs FACT... (X.) FACT
vs FANCY... (Y.) FANCY vs FACT... (Z.) FANCY vs FANCY.
The four Language sign references are... (w.) MANIFEST vs MANIFEST...
(x.) MANIFEST vs. CONCEAL... (y.)CONCEAL vs MANIFEST... (z.) CONCEAL
vs. CONCEAL...
NOW JUST TA GET YA STARTED.... WHAT WOULD JUST ONE OF THE POSSIBLE
'LOGICAL' CUBES BE???? Let's start with the simpler one....
FACT vs FACT / MAN. vs MAN.****FANCY vs FANCY / CON. vs CON.
.....W..............w................Z................z....
FACT vs FACT / CON. vs CON.****FANCY vs FANCY / MAN. vs MAN.
.....W..............z................Z................w....
I know... it is hard to "visualize" the cube (problem is I can't draw
it and show one on this message board)... but try consider each of the
four Language signs above as one of the "cube" (square) faces.... Try
to figure out how many possible "cubes" there are before I tell
yas.... let's make this "interactive"....
(Y'ALL WANNA DO SPHERES, NOW? CONTINUE.)
nominal9
(Y'ALL WANNA DO SPHERES, NOW? CONTINUE.)
Language Sign Spheres are easier to understand... they correspond to
the "circle" roles at the Applied Sign Plane (agent, patient,
recipent, prompter, remember?). There are only four of them at the
Language Sign Plane, too, but they are just more involved due to the
greater complexity at this level... I call them the:
Possessor.... that person(s) who "combines" up the Language Sign...
Communicator...that person(s) who "voices" or "transmits" the Language
Sign...
Addressee.... that person(s) who is meant to "hear" or "receive" the
(communicated) Language Sign...
Transposer...that person(s) who , coincidently, also "hears" or
"receives" the (communicated) Language Sign, although the said
Language Sign is not directed at that person(s).
Now... y'all chew those things over for a while..... Good luck with
the "CUBES", in particular....
nominal9
> attribute or quality of the thing....http://www.bartleby.com/196/123.html
nominal9
I have brought over three more entries from the Yahoo site. These are
a bit mixed.... Two entries deal with the story line.... Snow White
and her initial dealings with the dwarfs. The middle entry deals with
my "methodology"... it tries to explain my "onotlogical pyramids" a
bit more in depth to cc... who did not grasp the diagram or what it
was about.... Part of the problem is that I can't draw diagrams on
these boards... but I hope the method is getting across to you,
here.... I would like to hear any and all questions that you may
have.... particularly as to method.... do you understand how these
first deceptions "work".... the pig liver and lungs being concealed
and "labeled" to be the liver and lungs of Snow White? This is what I
call the "Language Sign plane" where each Applied Sign "thing" or
course of action is communicated from one story character(s) to
another(s)..... It is in the process of these communications that some
things or courses of action are turned into LIES....
Howdy, y'all continuation of the Dwarfs "reception" of Snow White....
http://www.pitt.edu/~dash/grimm053.html
"The dwarfs said, "If you will keep house for us, and cook, make beds,
wash, sew, and knit, and keep everything clean and orderly, then you
can stay with us, and you shall have everything that you want."
"Yes," said Snow-White, "with all my heart." "
So.... the Dqwrfs have a "proposition" for Snow White.... and it isn't
a bad deal, either.... as "agents" they suggest that the "patient",
Snow White, perform the following courses of action.... "keep house
for us, and cook, make beds, wash, sew, and knit, and keep everything
clean and orderly".... which would all have the dwarfs as the
"recipients" (i.e.,"for us)....For their part of the bargain.... the
dwarfs say that they will as both
"agents and patients" perform the "reciprocal" course of action
of ...."you can stay with us, and you shall have everything that you
want.".... which would have Snow White as the "recipient".... This, in
part, fills in the sign "Friendship / cooperate" and its related
thematic dialectic.... but it also implies another one that I haven't
brought up yet.... here it is below...
(Dwarfs / Snow White)..........(queen / queen)
live modestly / work..........live lavishly / steal
GOOD / GOOD...................BAD / BAD
live modestly / steal.........live lavishly / work
GOOD / BAD....................BAD /GOOD
Uh, Oh..... now we're startin' to get into "politics"....
Toodles....
Hello cc....It's these diagrams as well as the forum in which they
have to be presented in. Twas completely lost on the 3-D stuff./cc
Sorry that I confused you with the 3d stuff.... they are really just
diagrams and the important thing is to try to see how they work....
maybe if I try to talk it through, it might help... there are two
(Ockham) sign levels.... the "first intention"{direct empirical
experience of some thing} and the "second intention" {abstracted, in
the mind, grouping or categorizing of "similar", remembered "first
intention" some things together, in various ways).... there are also
two ways to "interact" with the said "some things".... either in an
applied way....1) by, through some intellectual motivation{concept},
using them and performing actions {referene} with them.... AND/OR
(either separately or at the same time) 2) by communicating the
"words" that stand for those "somethings"....
When you interact in the 1) way.... you are "applying" those "courses
of action" and your immediate question is whether or not you are (from
some standpoint) ethically or morally .... "planning and doing the
right thing"....But 2) when you are talking about those "courses of
action" to some other person(s), your immediate question is whether or
not the person(s) you are talking to "understands"... IF THAT IS WHAT
YOU ARE AFTER... the course of action that you "communicate"... that
you want to ultimately perform....
So, at the APPLIED Sign Plane you have the "course of action" that can
be rendered under the three part Ockham
..............Sign(Vox)
concept(conceptus).............reference(res)
GOOD or BAD....................GOOD or BAD
with the corresponding moral or ethical predicated value judgments...
But when at the LANGUAGE Sign Plane you then talk or "communicate"
that same sign, then you have to also try to "stipulate" an
ONTOLOGY.... a context of "existence" for the "course of action" that
you want to "signify" with your words.... this ONTOLOGY is divisable
into two major aspects.... a "Language sign" CONCEPT (aspect) and
"Language sign" REFERENCE (aspect), if you will.... The language sign
concept establishes whether the "word" you are communicating, actually
means something that"exists" AS IS in the world.... in which first
case it is a language sign concept--FACT or whether, instead, the word
means something that "does not exist" AS IS in the world but is
somehow only "fantastical" or made up....in which second case it is a
language sign concept--FANCY....The second part of the ONTOLOGY
question then involves "Language sign" REFERENCE whether the "word"
you are communicating is used to MANIFEST (or show) the something that
you are talking about or whether, instead the "word" you are
communicating is used to CONCEAL (or hide) the something that you are
talking about...
Now, each aspect of the language sign ONTOLOGY question if distributed
over each aspect of the applied sign being communicated....so.... the
Applied sign concept and the Applied sign reference , in turn , BOTH
get separate language sign concepts AND languuage sign references on
their own. For example.... as I think I tried to show before
....................APPLIED SIGN..........
CONCEPT..............................REFERENCE
^^^^^^...............................^^^^^^
LANGUAGE SIGN........................LANGUAGE SIGN
CONCPT....REFERENCE..................CONCEPT....REFERENCE
I hope that helps.... some.
That's it for today, so long.
nominal9
I tried to post some more about the "SNOW WHITE" tale just now... but
the message boards did not hold "stable" enopugh for me to complete
the entire message.... I got only so far and then I lost the "reply
message" page.... something is wrong either with the bord or with the
time intervals that it takes me to post involved messages....
sorry.... I had another dialectic in mind... I will try to show it
below... if it doesn't blank out, regarding Snow White and the
dwarfs...
careful / let no one in.......... careless / let someone in
caution / guard....................dereliction / neglect
GOOD / GOOD.........................BAD / BAD
careful / let someone in..........careless / let no one in
caution / neglect..................dereliction / guard
This course of action is also suggested by the dwarfs, as 'agents',
for Snow White to perform, as patient, while they are away
working ....
" So she kept house for them. Every morning they went into the
mountains looking for ore and gold, and in the evening when they came
back home their meal had to be ready. During the day the girl was
alone.
The good dwarfs warned her, saying, "Be careful about your stepmother.
She will soon know that you are here. Do not let anyone in."
Snow White will NOT do as she is warned... this is a BAD choice ....
think about it and contrast this "role relationship" situation with
the one that held between the queen and the huntsman earlier in the
tale..... they are different "ethically" but the involve some of the
same "thematic dialectics".... only Snow White's situation introduces
other thematic dialectics that have not been broached yet... can y'all
think what some or more of those may be????
nominal9
nominal9
I haven't heard from you for a while. Maybe it is because I have been
posting way too much material at once. Sorry about that.... as I said,
I want to make sure that I get it here before it disappears from the
other yahoo board. As you can see.... I am starting to treat the topic
of "deceptions". Please don't get too annoyed with me or discouraged
if you are trying to keep up.... Remember, once the "stuff" is here,
if you or anyone else is interested.... we can always go back and pick
it apart.... I have here completed two story deceptions... the pig...
and the lace bodice.... Two more to go.... the comb and the poisoned
apple. Then I will get to where I was forced to leave poor Snow White
encased in her glass coffin. From there, I will have to "write" some
new material to account for getting her out and ending the story....
nominal9
Pork, the other white meat....
To continue, upon consulting her "magic mirror", the queen soon hears
that Snow White is still alive...
"Now the queen, believing that she had eaten Snow-White's lungs and
liver, could only think that she was again the first and the most
beautiful woman of all. She stepped before her mirror and said:
Mirror, mirror, on the wall,
Who in this land is fairest of all?
It answered:
You, my queen, are fair; it is true.
But Snow-White, beyond the mountains
With the seven dwarfs,
Is still a thousand times fairer than you.
This startled the queen, for she knew that the mirror did not lie, and
she realized that the huntsman had deceived her, and that Snow-White
was still alive. Then she thought, and thought again, how she could
kill Snow-White, for as long as long as she was not the most beautiful
woman in the entire land her envy would give her no rest."
I want to consider two issues at this point.... One, what are the
effects upon the queen and what are the consequences for the huntsman
of the queen's recognition "that the huntsman had deceived her"?....
Two, what is the queen's reaction upon learning that "Snow white is
still alive"?
As to the first issue, I want to recap the huntsman's deception....
let me recall an overall diagram...
****
Let's take the huntsman's deception as a starting point. We said that
he had two APLLIED SIGNS to start his deception with.... one was "Snow
White" and the other a "Boar"... these two "triangles" of Applied
Signs were as follows:
.......Snow White..........( versus) .......Boar....
intellect / human body................simple / pig body
soul..................................sensation........
GOOD /GOOD............................BAD /BAD
(For the Language sign we add the Pyramid bases, watch)
FACT / FACT..........................FACT / FACT
MANIFEST / MANIFEST..................CONCEAL / CONCEAL
(the results are the "communicated" language signs)
.........Snow White....... (versus).... Snow White....
this is the truth.....................this is a lie...
Get the "picture"???? Applied sign at the Apex... Four part
"ontological" Language sign at the base.... PYRAMID.
****
AS "agent/ patient", the huntsman took the lungs and liver of a boar
at the APPLIED SIGN PLANE, he then totally "concealed" their identity
at the LANGUAGE SIGN PLANE and, as "possessor/communicator", the
huntsman told the queen that they were the lungs and liver of Snow
White. This deception was realtively easy to carry out since the queen
(and I soubt any "non specialized" reader, today) could be expected to
distinguish between those disembodied pig and human organs by sight or
otherwise. This was a {fact vs fact / conceal vs conceal} deception,
as the recalled diagram abo.ve should make clear. Anyway, it appears
that the difference in "effect" upon the queen for having eaten pig
flesh instead of Snow White flesh was negligible. As to any
consequrences for the huntsman for having deceived the queen, the text
is silent as to whether or not the queen punished or retaliated
against him in any way. Without speculation, I will leave it at that.
But notice that the deception was believed by the queen as "addressee"
at the LANGUAGE SIGN PLANE.... at least until the mirror blabbed.
Subsequently... two... the queen's reaction upon hearing that Snow
White is alive is to, for her part, resume her previously noted
courses of action of .... rivalry / compete... envy / supplant... and
malice / kill... with regard to Snow White.
nominal9
Howdy y'all... the "bodice lace deception"... anybody there?
http://www.pitt.edu/~dash/grimm053.html
"At last she thought of something. Coloring her face, she disguised
herself as an old peddler woman, so that no one would recognize her.
In this disguise she went to the house of the seven dwarfs.
Snow-White peered out the window and said, "Good day, dear woman, what
do you have for sale?"
"Good wares, beautiful wares," she answered. "Bodice laces in all
colors." And she took out one that was braided from colorful silk.
"Would you like this one?"
"I can let that honest woman in," thought Snow-White, then unbolted
the door and bought the pretty bodice lace.
"Child," said the old woman, "how you look! Come, let me lace you up
properly."
The unsuspecting Snow-White stood before her and let her do up the new
lace, but the old woman pulled so quickly and so hard that Snow-White
could not breathe.
"You used to be the most beautiful one," said the old woman, and
hurried away.
Not long afterward, in the evening time, the seven dwarfs came home.
How terrified they were when they saw their dear Snow-White lying on
the ground, not moving at all, as though she were dead. They lifted
her up, and, seeing that she was too tightly laced, they cut the lace
in two. Then she began to breathe a little, and little by little she
came back to life.
When the dwarfs heard what had happened they said, "The old peddler
woman was no one else but the godless queen. Take care and let no one
in when we are not with you."
Actually, there are two deceptions involved in this sequence of
actions and reactions. First, there is the deception of the queen
disguising herself as an old peddler woman. And second, there is the
deception of the bodice lace. These deceptioons may not necessarily
involve strictly thematic oppositions in significance.... they may
only involve oppositions in the moral or ethical predicated values of
of signs belonging to different thematic sets but which are
contraposed for the purposes of the course of action to be carried out
(i.e., harmful versus harmless aspects)... but, more or less,the
oppositions do manage to be thematic, as well.
In the moral or ethical contrast between the queen as opposed to her
disguise as an old peddler woman, the following two APPLIED SIGNS and
pertinent courses of action are involved.
......Queen.........................Peddler......
live lavishly / steal......... live modestly / work...
malice / kill................. commerce / sell....
dishonest / young face.........honest / old face....
BAD / BAD.........................GOOD /GOOD
The text says that the queen..." Coloring her face, she disguised
herself as an old peddler woman, so that no one would recognize
her"....So, the queen totally conceals her appearance all of her self-
motivated 'agent / patient' malice / kill APPLIED SIGN course of
action and, at the LANGUAGE SIGN plane, as 'possessor / communicator'
the disguised queen communicates a "commerce / sell fictional course
of action.
The "addressee" at the LANGUAGE SIGN plane is Snow White and she falls
for the first deception...." Snow-White peered out the window and
said, "Good day, dear woman, what do you have for sale?" "
(continued) nominal9
When placed within a Language sign "pyramid".... the first deception
is seen to function exactly like the huntsman's deception concerning
Snaow White's liver and lungs as contrasted to the boar's liver and
lungs did... let me diagram it, as follows:
.....................APPLIED SIGN..............
......Queen.........................Peddler......
live lavishly / steal......... live modestly / work...
malice / kill................. commerce / sell....
dishonest / young face.........honest / old face....
BAD / BAD.........................GOOD /GOOD
...............LANGUAGE SIGN......................
^^^^....^^^^.....................^^^^....^^^^
FACT vs FACT.....................FACT vs FACT
CONCEAL vs CONCEAL...............MANIFEST vs MANIFEST
(the resulting communicated signs are as follows:)
......Peddler......................Peddler
This is the lie................. no real was ever there...
The disguised queen then proceeds to the second deception wich
concerns the bodice lace. This deception contraposes two APPLIED SIGNS
and related courses of action, as shown here....
.......bodice lace.................garrotte.....
clothing / tighten...............choking / tighten
fastener...comfortably...........weapon....viciously
GOOD / GOOD.......................BAD / BAD
These Applied signs can be squared as follows:
clothing / tighten.................choking / tighten
fastener...comfortably.............weapon.... viciously
GOOD / GOOD.........................BAD / BAD
clothing / tighten.................choking / tighten
fastener...viciously...............weapon....comfortably
GOOD / BAD..........................BAD /GOOD
Now, this may get to be a little "complex" for the "novitiate" to
NOMINAL9'S THEMATIC DIALECTIC LOGIC.... y'all remember where y'all
learnt this.... do not plagiarize or otherwise act like
thievin' (religious fanatic) heathens...
(continued.... tomorrow.... maybe)
nominal9
Howdy, yous voyeurs.... I know who you are and where yous is... so
don't think yous is gettin' away wit anythin'...
****
These Applied signs can be squared as follows:
clothing / tighten.................choking / tighten
fastener...comfortably.............weapon.... viciously
GOOD / GOOD.........................BAD / BAD
clothing / tighten.................choking / tighten
fastener...viciously...............weapon....comfortably
GOOD / BAD..........................BAD /GOOD
Now, this may get to be a little "complex" for the "novitiate" to
NOMINAL9'S THEMATIC DIALECTIC LOGIC.... y'all remember where y'all
learnt this.... do not plagiarize or otherwise act like
thievin' (religious fanatic) heathens...
(continued.... tomorrow.... maybe)
nominal9
****
Here is what I sugest happens in this deception. At the APPLIED SIGN
plane, the disguised queen, as 'agent / patient' plans to "really"
perform a "clothing fastener / tighten viciously" (GOOD /BAD) course
of action directed against the 'recipient', Snow White. However, at
the LANGUAGE SIGN plane, the disguise queen, as 'possessor /
communicator' conceals the the Appplied Sign reference aspect "tighten
viciously" and communicates to Snow White, as 'addressee", the
fictional harmless Language aspect "tighten comfortably".... Let me
PYRAMID that for y'all.... what are we going to call the "real"
APPLIED SIGN here.... a combination of "Lace" and "Garrotte".... how
about....
. APPLIED SIGN PLANE.................
.................LA-ROTTE.....................
clothing fastener / tighten viciously
GOOD...................BAD
.LANGUAGE SIGN PLANE
FACT....................FACT
MANIFEST................CONCEAL
(resulting communication)
clothing fastener / tighten comfortably
................LACE..........
This is the lie. In order for the disguised queebn's course of action
to function, she needs the willing participation of the "dupe"
recipient, Snow White.This happens when Snow White performs, as
'agent / patient' a "careless / let someone in" course of action with
regard to her own safety. [Remember, the dwarfs had specifically
"told" her to do the "opposite"..... But NOOO... Snow White "knew
better" and had to do things "her" way.... kids those days.... I tell
ya].This action of letting her guard down allows the disguised queen
to first "sell" Snow White the bodice lace fastener and second to then
reveal the LA-ROTTE actual concealed APPLIED SIGN reference aspect and
"viciously tighten" and thereby choke the air out of Snow White's
lungs....
Not bad for action - reaction NOMINAL9 THEMATIC DIALECTIC LOGIC....
hey..... BTW.... it is "copyrighted", y'all... so watch it.... fair
use and all, but with "attribution"... I can use those "nickles"....
nominal9
On Apr 10, 12:30 pm, "nominal9" <nomin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hello Sam Carana and/or any other possible readers.
> I have brought over three more entries from the Yahoo site. These are
> a bit mixed.... Two entries deal with the story line.... Snow White
> and her initial dealings with the dwarfs. The middle entry deals with
> my "methodology"... it tries to explain my "onotlogical pyramids" a
> bit more in depth to cc... who did not grasp the diagram or what it
> was about.... Part of the problem is that I can't draw diagrams on
> these boards... but I hope the method is getting across to you,
> here.... I would like to hear any and all questions that you may
> have.... particularly as to method.... do you understand how these
> first deceptions "work".... the pig liver and lungs being concealed
> and "labeled" to be the liver and lungs of Snow White? This is what I
> call the "Language Sign plane" where each Applied Sign "thing" or
> course of action is communicated from one story character(s) to
> another(s)..... It is in the process of these communications that some
> things or courses of action are turned into LIES....
>
> Howdy, y'all continuation of the Dwarfs "reception" of Snow White....http://www.pitt.edu/~dash/grimm053.html
nominal9
end.... hang in there..../nominal9
Next comes the last sequence of actions and reactions (as well as some
"explanations") for this "Moment" of the overall "Event".
****
http://www.pitt.edu/~dash/type0709.html#...
Nightfall soon came, and the seven dwarfs returned home. They were
horrified to find their dear Snow-White lying on the ground as if she
were dead. They lifted her up and saw that she was laced up too
tightly. They cut the bodice laces in two, and then she could breathe,
and she came back to life. "It must have been the queen who tried to
kill you," they said. "Take care and do not let anyone in again."
****
When the dwarfs arrive on the scene, they first assume the role of
'prompters' to the overall situation.... they are not directly
involved in with it in any way (i.e., they are not the 'agents' who
motivated the queen, they are not the 'patients' who assaulted Snow
White, they are not the 'recipients' who were "strangled") the dwarfs
are just witnesses , after the fact, to what occurred. But then the
dwarfs are self-motivated to perform , as 'agents and patients' a
sympathy / give course of action with regard to the 'recipient', Snow
White [GOOD/GOOD remember, I have already introduced this thematic
dialectic... the direct opposite would have been apathy / do nothing].
Specifically, the dwarfs notice the physical cause of Snow White's
distress.... the viciously tight bodice laces (la-rotte)... and they
cut them (Remedy/cut laces ?). Here's another thematic dialectic that
can apply here...
Health / intact..... Illness / injury
GOOD / GOOD..........BAD / BAD
Health / injury.....Illness / intact
GOOD / BAD..........BAD / GOOD
By the way, I hope I am getting across to y'all that, many times.....
things are not always totally GOOD or totally BAD.... and it is not a
matter of "shades of gray", necessarily.... but, let me suggest,
somehow "incongruent" concepts and/or references that are joined
together. That's life.
Furthermore, the dwarfs "explain" to Snow White that she has been
"duped" and deceived by the queen (At the Language Sign Plane, I might
add).... whose "real" motives and actions were not as GOOD as the
"fiction" which she told (clearly). The dwarfs then reiterate their
suggested course of action as, 'agents', for Snow White to perform, as
'patient', in the future.... "Take care and do not let anyone in
again." .... careful/ let no one in.....
Yeah, right.... like she's gonna listen....
nominal9
The "comb" deception... structurally.... is identical to the "lace
bodice" deception. Here again, the queen disguises herself as a
"different" old woman and tries to kill Snow White.So, once again the
quee's "disguise" deception consists in totally "concealing" her
factual self at the Applied Sign Plane and communicating the "fiction"
of an old woman to Snow White, as addressee, at the Language Sign
Plane.... [a "conceal vs conceal" Language Sign reference "ontology"
pattern]. The difference in the two (Bodice lace vis a vis comb)
deceptions rests in the "means" that the queen uses in acomplishing
her goal of killing. In This case, instead of modifying a "bodice
lace" and using it to harmful effect.... the queen modifies a "comb"
and uses it to harmful effect. But notice that the way of modifying
the "comb".... structurally, at the Language Sign plane.... was the
same as the one that was seen for the "bodice lace" in the previous
incident.... the base Applied Sign CONCEPT of the "comb" remains the
same.... however, the base appleid sign REFERENCE of the "comb" is
physically altered into something "harmful" and then later it is
"concealed" upon being communicated by the queen to the addressee,
Snow White.... [ a "manifest vs. conceal" Language Sign reference
"ontology" pattern]. pattern].Again.... structurally, these "Applied
sign" and "Language Sign" are, in pattern and in moral or ethical
predicated values as well as in ontologic predicated valued, identical
in the two deception instances "bodice lace" vis a vis "comb"
deception.
http://www.pitt.edu/~dash/type0709.html
The queen asked her mirror:
"Mirror, mirror, on the wall,
Who in this land is fairest of all?
The mirror answered once again:
You, my queen, are fair; it is true.
But Little Snow-White with the seven dwarfs
Is a thousand times fairer than you.
She was so horrified that the blood all ran to her heart, because she
knew that Snow-White had come back to life. Then for an entire day and
a night she planned how she might catch her. She made a poisoned comb,
disguised herself differently, and went out again. She knocked on the
door, but Snow-White called out, "I am not allowed to let anyone in."
Then she pulled out the comb, and when Snow-White saw how it
glistened, and noted that the woman was a complete stranger, she
opened the door, and bought the comb from her. "Come, let me comb your
hair," said the peddler woman. She had barely stuck the comb into Snow-
White's hair, before the girl fell down and was dead. "That will keep
you lying there," said the queen. And she went home with a light
heart."
Now that I have pretty much set the "structural" patterns of the two
deceptions... try to "fill in" the pertinent Thematic dialectic
"traingles" and "squares" of "signs" involved.... The queen disguise
is more or less identical to the previous "old peddler woman"
deception.... But the "comb" deception, clearly, has different applied
sign aspects than the previous "bodice lace" deception.... Anybody
want to try to identify what those could be???? . And one more
thing.... Twonickles, in particular.... What are we going to do with
this whole "supernatural... witchcraft.... godliness and ungodliness"
issue .... How are we going to account for it as a "thematic
dialectic" and as a "squared" contraposition? What are we going to
assign the whole issue, in its various aspects, as their due (Grimm)
moral or ethical predicated values? Not to mention their due ontologic
values in the context of this "tale world"?
nominal9
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comb
>From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
For other uses, see Comb (disambiguation).
A comb is a device made of solid material, generally flat, always
toothed, and is used in hair care for straightening and cleaning hair
or other fibers.
The etymology of the English word is ancient, going straight back to
Proto-Indo-European roots meaning "tooth", "toothed", "to bite", and
found in ancient Greek and Sanskrit.
Combs are among the older tools known to mankind, having been found in
very refined forms already in settlements dating back to 5000 years
ago in Persia - possibly at the height of the first major Indo-
European migrations.
It can be argued that combs do not only have value as cosmetic
implements. Combs may have given users an evolutionary advantage by
helping in the endless fight against parasites. In fact, Indo-European
or otherwise, there are no known traditional civilizations that ignore
the use of combs, even those whose members have hair that is quite
hard to comb.
*****
.......Comb......
Hygiene / Draw "teeth"
Cleaning...through hair
GOOD.... / GOOD
*****
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arrow_poiso...
Arrow poisons
Arrow poisons are used to poison arrow heads or darts for the purposes
of hunting. They have been used by almost all primitive peoples
worldwide and are still in use in areas of South America, Africa and
Asia.
Notable examples are the poisons secreted from the skin of the poison
arrow frog and curare (or 'ampi'), a general term for a range of plant-
derived arrow poisons used by the indigenous peoples of South America.
[1]
Poisoned arrows have featured in mythology, notably the Greek story of
the slaying of Achilles by Paris, and Balder's death in the Norse
myths.
*******
....Poison Arrow
poison / "stick" toxin
..........into flesh
BAD / BAD
(For "innocent" People)
*****
I am "assuming" that the "queen" appleid some sort of "toxic"
substance to the "teeth" of the comb and then proceeded to physically
"stick" the "comb teeth" through the fleshy scalp of Snow White....
the other plausible alternative expalnation is that the queen applied
some sort of skin penetrating toxic substance (rarer) to the comb that
only needed physical contact with Snow White's skin to function. In
either case... below is the "moral" Applied sign and the pertinent
"ontologic" Language sign framework for this part of the deception....
APPLIED SIGN
...................Com-oxin.....
Hygiene, Cleaning.... / apply toxin
GOOD................../ BAD
LANGUAGE SIGN
FACT................../ FACT
MANIFEST............../ CONCEAL
(resulting "communicated" language sign)
Hygiene, Cleaning..../ Draw "teeth" through hair
...................Comb.......
****
Now, come on.... one of y'all couldn't have figured that one out?
Y'all just had to make me do all the work, again.
nominal9
Action....Reaction time, Comb deception....
So, in her different Old woman [A: GOOD/ GOOD, 'commerce / sell']
disguise[Wz: fact vs fact / conceal vs conceal] , the queen [D: BAD /
BAD, murder/ kill innocent] takes her poisoned comb [B: GOOD /BAD
hygiene, cleanse/ apply toxin] in hand.... which she lies [Wx: fact vs
fact / manifest vs conceal} and calls a plain comb... and goes to the
seven dwarfs' house to try to deceive the addressee, Snow White.
http://www.pitt.edu/~dash/type0709.html
"Then for an entire day and a night she planned how she might catch
her. She made a poisoned comb, disguised herself differently, and went
out again."
(By the way.... this Grimm text seems to have been "abridged" on this
link site from the text that we started with....)
However, Snow White does not "participate" with the disguised queen's
fictional course of action.....
She knocked on the door, but Snow-White called out, "I am not allowed
to let anyone in."
At first, then, Snow White, as 'patient' at the Applied Sign Plane
performs the [A; GOOD /GOOD, careful / let no one in] course of action
that was suggested to her by the dwarfs, as 'agents'.And which, it was
seen, seems to be the wise course considering that Snow White has
already disobeyed the dwarfs once in this regard and has had to suffer
the consequence of almost having bee murdered by "another" old woman
(eyup), before.
But the disguised queen persists in her deceptive "sales job" and Snow
White eventually falls for it. Snow White then performs, as both
'agent' and 'patient', the opposing [D: BAD /BAD, careless/ let
someone in] course of action....
Then she pulled out the comb, and when Snow-White saw how it
glistened, and noted that the woman was a complete stranger, she
opened the door,
By the way, I ask that y'all to consider whether there is some other
"motivated" course of action and related "thematic dialectic" of signs
that could account for Snow White's continued disobedience of the
dwarfs coutionary advice.... What was Snow White's "interest" in first
the "bodice lace" and now the "comb".... Get back to me on this.
Here too, the disguised queen carries through her [A: GOOD /GOOD ,
commerce / sell] Language sign fiction. But then, the queen later
reveals the concealed Applied sign reference aspect [BAD, apply toxin]
of her real Applied sign scheme [B: BAD /BAD , hygiene, cleanse /
apply toxin] and thereby harms or injures Snow White instead of
harmlessly drawing the comb teeth through her hair.
"Come, let me comb your hair," said the peddler woman. She had barely
stuck the comb into Snow-White's hair, before the girl fell down and
was dead. "That will keep you lying there," said the queen. And she
went home with a light heart.
nominal9
Comb deception conclusion.
http://www.pitt.edu/~dash/type0709.html#...
The dwarfs came home just in time. They saw what had happened and
pulled the poisoned comb from her hair. Snow-White opened her eyes and
came back to life. She promised the dwarfs not to let anyone in
again.
The Applied sign identity and pattern is the same in this "moment" as
it was seen to be in the prior "moment" of the bodice lace
deception..... the dwarfs arrive on the scene, first as 'prompters'
then as self-motivated both 'agents' and 'patients' the dwarfs adopt a
sympathy / give aid course of action.... In this particular case of
the comb deception, clearly, the "means" is different. The dwarfs
notice the comb, they somehow conclude that it is the "cause" of Snow
White's current state of illness/injury and, as a (concept) "remedy"
the dwarfs, themselves, perform the (reference) action of "pulling the
comb from Snow White's hair". The said course of action on the part of
the dwarfs is "effective" and Snow White returns to a stae of being
Healthy / Intact.... (remember some of the pertinent "thematic
dialectics", Y'all? Kindly don't make me repeat myself when yous can
go back and look 'em up). Then, of course, the dwarfs (implicitly, in
this tale version) tell Snow White again that the purported different
"old peddler" was really again the queen in disguise and they
reiterate their, 'agent', suggested course of action for Snow White to
perform, as 'patient', in the future of being.... careful / let no one
in. Of course, having read the whole story, we, the readers, know that
Snow White will not do so.... again....
I ask this question of CCWilloe and 2Nicks, in particular. I know that
CC, you said that you have have at least one child.... what do you
think from your "experienced" standpoint of Snow White's continuing
failure to do as she is told in this regard... in disobeying GOOD
"parent figure" dwarfs.... what does that "say" to you or "imply" to
you ladies within the context of this story or outside of it? Your
womanly "expertise" is better than mine in this area.... (and I am not
being in any way sexist when I say that).
nominal9
> Howdy y'all... the "bodice lace deception"... anybody there?http://www.pitt.edu/~dash/grimm053.html
nominal9
Here's the end of the Apple Decepttion and, I think, the end of what I
did on the Yahoo thread.... I will have to go back to see if I either
missed anything or if I want to bring over anything else. But, I think
from here on out.... I will have to get down to some more .... work...
Well, I do not know if anyone is there or following this thread....
but, I will get poor Snow White out of her glass coffin.... Maybe I
will leave one or two of the "tougher" thematic dialectics....
tacit.... just as a "tease" to those who purposely chose to Not
participate....
nominal9
The Poison Apple Deception....
http://www.pitt.edu/~dash/type0709.html#...
"You, my queen, are fair; it is true.
But Little Snow-White with the seven dwarfs
Is a thousand times fairer than you.
When the queen heard this, she shook and trembled with anger, "Snow-
White will die, if it costs me my life!" Then she went into her most
secret room -- no one else was allowed inside -- and she made a
poisoned, poisoned apple. From the outside it was red and beautiful,
and anyone who saw it would want it. Then she disguised herself as a
peasant woman, went to the dwarfs' house and knocked on the door.
Snow-White peeped out and said, "I'm not allowed to let anyone in. The
dwarfs have forbidden it most severely."
"If you don't want to, I can't force you," said the peasant woman. "I
am selling these apples, and I will give you one to taste."
"No, I can't accept anything. The dwarfs don't want me to."
"If you are afraid, then I will cut the apple in two and eat half of
it. Here, you eat the half with the beautiful red cheek!" Now the
apple had been so artfully made that only the red half was poisoned.
When Snow-White saw that the peasant woman was eating part of the
apple, her desire for it grew stronger, so she finally let the woman
hand her the other half through the window. She bit into it, but she
barely had the bite in her mouth when she fell to the ground dead."
The, by now, usual underlying Applied and Language sign patterns are
repeated for this Apple deception, also. The queen [D: BAD /BAD,
murder/ kill, etc.] disguises her appearance and "lies" to Snow White
by communicating a [Wz: FACT vs FACT / CONCEAL vs CONCEAL]
"peasant(peddler) woman" [A: GOOD/GOOD, commerce / sell] fiction. The
disguised queen then offers to Snow White a "poisoned apple" [ B:
GOOD / BAD, sustenance / apply toxin] which the disguised queen has
"lied" and communicated [Wx: FACT vs FACT / MANIFEST vs CONCEAL] as
being a "harmless" "fruit" apple. Again, Snow White is a willing
participant to the deceptions by abandoning the, 'agent', dwarf-
suggested [A: GOOD / GOOD, careful/ let no one in] course of action
and, instead, opting for her self-motivated [D: BAD / BAD, careless /
let someone in] course of action.
I asked y'all to consider the question of the difference between the
hunstsman and Snow White, when it comes to "obeying" and carrying out
the courses of action that were urged for them by the queen and by the
dwarfs. This gets into some more of the "underlying structural
framework " of NOMINAL9's THEMATIC DIALECTIC LOGIC. Consider, IF
(hypothetical) the huntsman had murdered Snow White (as ordered by the
queen).... Who would have had the ultimate LOCUS OF RESPONSIBILITY for
that act? (I say the queen). But, when the huntsman "disobeyed" the
queen and decided to let Snow White live.... Who then had the ultimate
LOCUS OF RESPONSIBILITY for that actual act? (I say the huntsman). The
same goes for the case of Snow White and the dwarfs. The dwarfs, as
'agents', would have had the ultimate LOCUS OF RESPONSIBILITY for
having kept Snow White same from harm (if she had followed their
careful/ let no on in course of action). But the second that Snow
White, as 'patient', says NO to the dwarfs and, instead, instates her
own careless / let someone in alternate course , then the LOCUS OF
RESPONSIBILITY is on her shoulders.... With the question of LOCUS OF
RESPONSIBILITY established, then the reader-audience, guided by the
author, gets into the "valuational" issue of DISTRIBUTING EITHER
PRAISE (FOR GOOD) OR BLAME (FOR BAD) on the respective characters. I
came up with (and copyrighted) all this about twenty years ago.
Plagiarism is thievery... any other sugarcoating is a lie.
nominal9
Poison apple... ulterior (implicated) thematic dialectics. I want to
introduce two more "thematic dialectic" "squares", at this point....
They have been sort of "understood" in the background and they have
been gradually filling in as the tale progressed.... See if you can
pick out the one or two text words that indicate them or, maybe, you
can just rely on your, the reader-audience's, own "cultural" context
memory mind.
****
altruism / do for another..... selfishness / do for oneself
GOOD / GOOD.....................BAD / BAD
altruism / do for oneself......selfishness / do for another
GOOD / BAD......................BAD / GOOD
****
reserve / groom................vanity / adorn
GOOD /GOOD......................BAD / BAD
reserve / adorn................vanity / groom
*****
Now, if you think back on the sequence of tale "moments" treated so
far... how do these two thematic dialectics "apply" in some of the
more "comparable" instances? Was the huntsman acting "selfishly" or
"altruistically" when he decided to let Snow White live.... clearly, a
[A; GOOD /GOOD, altruism / do for another] course of action
corresponded to the huntsman's decision to "disobey" the queen's
order. How about Snow White when she, three times, disobeyed the
dwarfs' urgings that she be careful and let no one in? Of course, Snow
White was acting "selfishly" in disobeying the dwarfs. Snow White was
"seduced" by the pretty bodice lace by the shiny comb and by the
luscious red apple. Snow White was pursuing a [D: BAD / BAD
selfishness/ do for oneself] course of action in all three
instances.... And what was the "motivation" for Snow White's
"interest" in the "bodice lace" the "comb" and , in a different sense,
the apple.... were any of those items... necessities, or were they
really, instead, luxuries. I think (actually, I know) if you, the
reader-audience, goes back and reviews the text, you will find that
Snow White was "covetous" (there's an implied dialectic here, too) of
"luxuries" when she instated her [D: BAD / BAD, vanity / adorn] course
of action..... Poor Snow White.... is she in jeopardy of being
"tempted" into a future of "evil" ....both by and just like her wicked
stepmother queen?.... or is it just the immature, naive, curiosity and
acqusitiveness of a youngster who doesn't know or who hasn't been
taught better?.... This is a question for CC and 2Nicks.....But I
don't know if I can "trust" 2Nicks' "moral compass" anymore....
apparently, 2Nicks is a devotee of Ayn Rand's "SELFISH EGOTISM" pseudo/
scientific-fortune-cookie-philosophical/whacky psycho-babble....
nominal9
nominal9
Apple deception continued... the dwarfs get home.
http://www.pitt.edu/~dash/type0709.html#...
When the dwarfs came home that evening they found Snow-White lying on
the ground. She was not breathing at all. She was dead. They lifted
her up and looked for something poisonous. They undid her laces. They
combed her hair. They washed her with water and wine. But nothing
helped. The dear child was dead, and she remained dead. They laid her
on a bier, and all seven sat next to her and mourned for her and cried
for three days. They were going to bury her, but she still looked as
fresh as a living person, and still had her beautiful red cheeks.
They said, "We cannot bury her in the black earth," and they had a
transparent glass coffin made, so she could be seen from all sides.
They laid her inside, and with golden letters wrote on it her name,
and that she was a princess. Then they put the coffin outside on a
mountain, and one of them always stayed with it and watched over her.
The animals too came and mourned for Snow-white, first an owl, then a
raven, and finally a dove.
So... the, by now, usual "reaction" sequence from the dwarfs... an
initial "prompter" reaction of [A: GOOD / GOOD, sympathy/give aid]
followed by a self-motivated agent/patient scheme of [A: GOOD / GOOD,
remedy /cure]. as is seen in the text above, the dwarfs go through
their whole retinue of prior experience "actions" in order to "cure"
Snow White. They first "undid her laces". Second, "They combed her
hair". In this version of the tale they went so far as to also "They
washed her with water and wine". But none of these "attempted" cures
are "effective". Sadly, "But nothing helped. The dear child was dead,
and she remained dead". Now here's a related issue for Rei to
consider.... it appears that the dwarfs are pretty "modern' in their
approach to curing "Illness" in Snow White.... they "scientifically"
look for "natural causes" and seek to remove or "alleviate" them....
How doe this whole issue tie in to the distiction between the
"natural" and the "supernatural" in this tale?.... If the quen was
truly dealing in "magic" when it came to the poison, at least.... then
the cure should have had to have been "magical" too... wouldn't you
think? All the dwrfs did was to remove the physical source of
"toxin"... in our more modern day sense... Maybe there's an
"intellectual" refutation of magic in that?.... Still.... the mirror
does still talk. though.
Another pair of thematic dialectics to consider....
mourning / cry........... exultation / laugh
GOOD / GOOD................BAD / BAD
mourning / laugh......... exultation / cry
GOOD / BAD.................BAD / GOOD
****
reverence / bury ...... debasement / leave exposed
honor......(encase).................. (scanvanger eat)
GOOD / GOOD...............BAD / BAD
reverence / leave eposed ..... debasement / bury
honor......(scavanger eat)...................(encase)
GOOD / BAD......................BAD / GOOD
nominal9
Another pair of thematic dialectics to consider....
mourning / cry........... exultation / laugh
GOOD / GOOD................BAD / BAD
mourning / laugh......... exultation / cry
GOOD / BAD.................BAD / GOOD
****
reverence / bury ...... debasement / leave exposed
honor......(encase).................. (scanvanger eat)
GOOD / GOOD...............BAD / BAD
reverence / leave eposed ..... debasement / bury
honor......(scavanger eat)...................(encase)
GOOD / BAD......................BAD / GOOD
Ah yes, here we (readers) come to another set of "moments" in the
overall "event" of the story. How many "moments" has it been? Maybe we
can do a summary at the end. And what exactly are these "moments",
anyway? Well, in NOMINAL9'S THEMATIC DIALECTIC LOGIC... a "moment" is
made up of each and every individual "Applied Sign Scheme"... for
"action", or "Language Sign Scheme".... for "communication".... (Oh,
yeah... make no mistake.... this is still a very rudimenatry
demonstration.... pablum for the "kiddies", as it were)( I just said
that to get under the Uber-Alicers' skin....). So what are the current
Applied sign course of action "moments"?
"They laid her on a bier, and all seven sat next to her and mourned
for her and cried for three days.
The next one the reader "sees" is the dwarfs self-motivated agent/
patient [A: GOOD / GOOD , mourn / cry] course of action... Here, as a
contrary and in order to fill in the "thematic square", I remind y'all
of the queen's textaul reaction soon after she "killed" Snow White
with the poisoned apple...
" The queen looked at her with a gruesome stare, laughed loudly, and
said, "White as snow, red as blood, black as ebony wood! This time the
dwarfs cannot awaken you."
The above explicitly shows the contrary [D:. BAD / BAD, exult/ laugh]
course of action. From that point on, filling in the other poles of
this "thematic square", by "implication" is easy.... although in many
cases it gets harder for a reader.
Afterwards, the dwarfs, as self-motivated agents/patients, then
instated an [A: GOOD /GOOD, reverence / bury(encase)] course of action
in the following "moment"
"They were going to bury her, but she still looked as fresh as a
living person, and still had her beautiful red cheeks.
They said, "We cannot bury her in the black earth," and they had a
transparent glass coffin made, so she could be seen from all sides.
They laid her inside, and with golden letters wrote on it her name,
and that she was a princess. Then they put the coffin outside on a
mountain, and one of them always stayed with it and watched over her.
The animals too came and mourned for Snow-white, first an owl, then a
raven, and finally a dove."
The contrary for this 'thematic dialectic square is provided at the
beginning of the tale when the queen wanted to see Snow White murdered
and then have her body left exposed for herself and the wild animals
to scavange... I won't quote it again for space reasons.... but y'all
know it is there.
nominal9
On Apr 12, 10:44 am, "nominal9" <nomin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> End of lace bodice and on to comb deception.... getting near the
> end.... hang in there..../nominal9
>
> Next comes the last sequence of actions and reactions (as well as some
> "explanations") for this "Moment" of the overall "Event".
> ****http://www.pitt.edu/~dash/type0709.html#...
> deception.http://www.pitt.edu/~dash/type0709.html
> nominal9http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comb>From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
>
> Jump to: navigation, search
> For other uses, see Comb (disambiguation).
>
> A comb is a device made of solid material, generally flat, always
> toothed, and is used in hair care for straightening and cleaning hair
> or other fibers.
>
> The etymology of the English word is ancient, going straight back to
> Proto-Indo-European roots meaning "tooth", "toothed", "to bite", and
> found in ancient Greek and Sanskrit.
>
> Combs are among the older tools known to mankind, having been found in
> very refined forms already in settlements dating back to 5000 years
> ago in Persia - possibly at the height of the first major Indo-
> European migrations.
>
> It can be argued that combs do not only have value as cosmetic
> implements. Combs may have given users an evolutionary advantage by
> helping in the endless fight against parasites. In fact, Indo-European
> or otherwise, there are no known traditional civilizations that ignore
> the use of combs, even those whose members have hair that is quite
> hard to comb.
> *****
>
> .......Comb......
>
> Hygiene / Draw "teeth"
> Cleaning...through hair
> GOOD.... / GOOD
> *****http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arrow_poiso...
> Comb deception conclusion.http://www.pitt.edu/~dash/type0709.html#...
Sam Carana
- murder and cruelty
nominal9
Snow-White lay there in the coffin a long, long time, and she did not
decay, but looked like she was asleep, for she was still as white as
snow and as red as blood, and as black-haired as ebony wood.
Now it came to pass that a prince entered these woods and happened
onto the dwarfs' house, where he sought shelter for the night. He saw
the coffin on the mountain with beautiful Snow-White in it, and he
read what was written on it with golden letters.
Then he said to the dwarfs, "Let me have the coffin. I will give you
anything you want for it."
But the dwarfs answered, "We will not sell it for all the gold in the
world."
Then he said, "Then give it to me, for I cannot live without being
able to see Snow-White. I will honor her and respect her as my most
cherished one."
As he thus spoke, the good dwarfs felt pity for him and gave him the
coffin. The prince had his servants carry it away on their shoulders.
But then it happened that one of them stumbled on some brush, and this
dislodged from Snow-White's throat the piece of poisoned apple that
she had bitten off. Not long afterward she opened her eyes, lifted the
lid from her coffin, sat up, and was alive again.
"Good heavens, where am I?" she cried out.
The prince said joyfully, "You are with me." He told her what had
happened, and then said, "I love you more than anything else in the
world. Come with me to my father's castle. You shall become my wife."
Snow-White loved him, and she went with him. Their wedding was planned
with great splendor and majesty.
Snow-White's godless stepmother was also invited to the feast. After
putting on her beautiful clothes she stepped before her mirror and
said:
Mirror, mirror, on the wall,
Who in this land is fairest of all?
The mirror answered:
You, my queen, are fair; it is true.
But the young queen is a thousand times fairer than you.
The wicked woman uttered a curse, and she became so frightened, so
frightened, that she did not know what to do. At first she did not
want to go to the wedding, but she found no peace. She had to go and
see the young queen. When she arrived she recognized Snow-White, and
terrorized, she could only stand there without moving.
Then they put a pair of iron shoes into burning coals. They were
brought forth with tongs and placed before her. She was forced to step
into the red-hot shoes and dance until she fell down dead.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
End of story..... Sam Carana, et al....
So, What happens at the end of the tale.... a few things. First....
the prince arives on the scene and he falls in love with Snow
White....still encased in her Glass Coffin. Then the prince asks for
and finally gets, from the seven Dwarfs, custody of the Glass Coffin
containing Snow White. Next, in the process of moving the Glass
Coffin, Snow White is awoken from her poison apple induced slumber.
The prince then relates his love for her to Snow White... and he asks
her to marry him.... Snow White says yes to the proposal. The couple,
the prince and Snow White, have a marriage ceremony, to which the
wicked queen in also invited. The wicked queen, upon consulting with
her Magic Mirror, learns that there is again another more beautiful
female than herself alive in the world and that is the young queen,
whose wedding she has just been invited to.... The wicked queen has
great forebodings (does she know that the young queen is really Snow
White... resuscitated?) but the wicked queen must see the young queen.
At the wedding, the wicked queen recognizes Snow White as the young
queen, the wicked quen is terrorized but cannot flee. The wicked queen
is then forced to place her feet in red hot shoes and she "dances" to
her death.
Let me skip over the connecting actions and reactions of how the
prince came to be at the dwarfs' home and how he saw Snow Whirte in
her Glass Coffin.... they are just secondary moments without thematic
relevance to the tale. Let me introduce two variations of the "Love
Thematic Dialectic" that I think have application here:
Love / entreat......................................Venality / give
gifts
GOOD / GOOD.....................................BAD /BAD
Love / give gifts....................................Venality /
entreat
GOOD / BAD.......................................BAD / GOOD
****
Love / give affection freely.....................Decorum / buy &sell
affection
GOOD / GOOD....................................BAD /BAD
Love / buy &sell affection......................Decorum / give
affection freely
GOOD / BAD.......................................BAD / GOOD
The "Love Thematic Dialectic" (like many others) varies somewhat from
author to author and with the situation being treated.... but it's
basic outlines usually remain very close. Here I use the word
"decorum" to contrast "love" with a rigid sense of social propriety
that could have been invoked by the dwarfs in denying the prince's
request to obtain the Glass coffin..... without "due payment", of
course. Anyway, consider these as "different ways of doing (almost)
the same or similar "motivated things" or courses of action.... it's
just that one is "morally or "ethically" better than the other....
according to the particular author..... The dwarfs did not require
payment... which the prince offered to provide... but gave the coffin
freely, etc. Think it over, I will get back to this tomorrow... if
anyone is there.
nom,inal9
On Apr 13, 8:35 pm, "Sam Carana" <sam.car...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Good to see your analysis, Nominal, there's enough in the tale for more
> thought:
> - snow white skin...
> - black earth versus a transparent glass coffin
> - talking mirror and vanity
> - dwarfs
> - queen, prince and royalty
> - huntsman, wild animals
> - poisoned apple
> - murder and cruelty
>
> Cheers!
> Sam Carana
>
nominal9
the line spacing imposed by the program, here. I have tried to correct
it, below, by palcing the applied Sign reference aspects in their
correct positions. I hope this makes better sense
>Love / entreat.............................Venality /givegifts
> GOOD / GOOD...........................BAD /BAD
>
> Love / give gifts.......................Venality / entreat
> GOOD / BAD............................BAD / GOOD
> ****
> Love / give affection freely......Decorum / buy &sell
> ...............................................................affection
> GOOD / GOOD..............................BAD /BAD
>
> Love / buy &sell affection.........Decorum / give
>................................................. affection freely
> GOOD / BAD.............................BAD / GOOD
So, basically, we readers saw the prince ask the dwarfs to instate a
(I-D BAD /BAD decorum/ buy and sell affection applied sign scheme) and
proceed to sell the Glass Coffin containing Snow White to the prince.
The Dwarfs, of course, stated that they could not and would not sell
the Glass Coffin for all the money in the world. The prince then
asserted his love for Snow White and sated that he "could not live
without seeing her and that he would "honor" and "respect " her as his
most "cherished" one. (There is another "love" thematic dialectic here
that I will try to treat as well) . The prince then suggests that the
dwarfs then freely give the Glass Coffin to him, that is. he asks them
to, instead instate a (II-A GOOD /GOOD love /give affection freely
applied sign scheme) instead. The dwarfs, at this point, feel
"pity" (recalling some thematic dialectics that have already been
identified) for the prince and the dwarfs, do, then give the Glass
Coffin containing Snow White to the prince. More later...
nominal9
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
nominal9
supplement the two "love" dialectics seen just before.... This one is
very "scant" and I only add it through my own "familiarity" with such
literary "topoi".... there's a fancy word for ya... from reading other
such stories.... I refer to the "courtesy /respect" thematic
dialectic which I "square" below:
courtesy / respect..... .....................impudence / infringe
GOOD / GOOD.................................BAD / BAD
courtesy / infringe............................impudence / respect
GOOD / BAD......................................BAD / GOOD
This thematic dialectic was referred to when the prince told the
dwarfs that he would treat Snow White as follows
" I will honor her and respect her as my most cherished one"
Therefore, it can be assumed that, for his part, the prince will
instate a (I-A GOOD /GOOD courtesy / respect) course of action with
regard to Snow White... who is, at this point still encased in her
Glass Coffin.
By the way... notice that the text word "honor" also recalls the
previously noted (I-A GOOD /GOOD Reverence & honor / bury...place in
Glass Coffin) with regard to Snow White's body.... it is communicated
by the prince to the dwarfs that he intends to also continue honoring
Snow White's presumed corpse.
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
nominal9
there. I would now like to treat the eventual resolution of the
"Poison Apple Deception"...remember, Snow White ate the Poison Apple
and "appeared" to have died for it. Here is what the eventual
resolution of that ordeal was, textually:
http://www.pitt.edu/~dash/grimm053.html
"The prince had his servants carry it away on their shoulders. But
then it happened that one of them stumbled on some brush, and this
dislodged from Snow-White's throat the piece of poisoned apple that
she had bitten off. Not long afterward she opened her eyes, lifted the
lid from her coffin, sat up, and was alive again."
As the reader notes, upon moving the Glass Coffin which contains the
"poisoned" body of Snow White.... one of the servant and pall bearers
stumbles. This jostleing dilodges the piece of poisoned apple from
Snow White's throat and, with the "cause" removed, the "effect" is
that Snow White awakens from her "drugged" slumber.
This direct episode sort of introduces another Thematic Dialectic that
can be rendered as follows:
Chance / Improvisation.......... Destiny/ Predetermination
GOOD / GOOD......................BAD/ BAD
Chance / Predetermination..... Destiny/ Improvisation
GOOD/ BAD..........................BAD / GOOD
We saw previously that the dwarfs went through their entire retinue of
knowlwdge and previous experience in trying to effect a (I-A GOOD/
GOOD remedy /revive) scheme to awaken Snow White... the dwarfs
performed various actions that had worked before. They undid now
White's bodice laces, to no effect. They searched for poisoned comds
and cleansed Snow White's hair, to no effect. They also tried
cleansing Snow white with vinegar, again to no effect. The "remedial
action", on this occassion consisted in removing the piece of poisoned
apple from Snow White's throat.... which the dwarfs did not see and
were not aware of.... Lucky thing that the servant and pall bearer
stumbled and dislodged it or poor Snow White may have been
slumbering still. So anyway.... consider the above Thematic Dialectic
in this context.... which Tale Character would you say, sought to
court "Destiny/ Predetermination"?.... the Wicked Queen, correct? And
which Tale Character seemed to be constantly "blessed" by "Chance /
Improvisation"?.... poor Snow White, correct?.... This sort of ties in
with a discussion I tried to raise of the distinction between "God and
the Supernatural" as it relates to this Snow White story on the Yahoo
thread.... maybe I will try to bring that up here, on this board, as
well.
Well, that's enough for now.... tomorrow, or another day, back to the
"love" thematic dialectic.... Snow White gets married.
nominal9
nominal9
text of the tale this is explained as follows:
"Good heavens, where am I?" she cried out.
The prince said joyfully, "You are with me." He told her what had
happened, and then said, "I love you more than anything else in the
world. Come with me to my father's castle. You shall become my wife."
Snow-White loved him, and she went with him. Their wedding was planned
with great splendor and majesty."
I want to introduce the "love" thematic dialecic again in a varied
form.... and perhaps a bit humorously ... by recalling two more "old"
old postings from the Yahoo site
What sort of a "union" relationship do you think the prince proposes
to Snow white.... and she accepts. Choose one from the choices
below....... I think that the prince proposes a ( I-A GOOD /GOOD
love/ monogamy) applied sign scheme in which the prince is the
"agent" and both the prince and Snow White, together, are the
"patients" of the course of action.
nominal9
Howdy Twonickles, CC (still there?), & y'all..... " MANSTER " I want
to coin it as a new word. In the interests of sexual equality, I want
MANSTER to be the male counterpart of MISTRESS.
I know.... it is a "grown up" topic.... and I only want to address it
"tastefully".... with kid gloves. Have y'all been following the
"scandal" with the love "triangle" going on between the three
astronauts???? Are either (any) of y'all from the area?.... Anyway....
I tangle with the so-called love "triangle" but in my own "thematic"
way as the "problematic" or "dialectic" between the following
categorematic signs.
..................Husband or Wife...................
fidelity...........................have sex with mate
love...............................monogamy
..................MANSTER or Mistress...............
infidelity.........................have sex with others
lust...............................polygamy or promiscuity
Now.... if we put that in a "square" it comes out like so:
(Concept based disposition, notice)
love/monogamy......................lust/promiscuity
love/promiscuity...................lust/ monogamy
How about (moral or ethical) predicated values.... what would y'all
recommend? You can put the "Good / Good" on any pole you want.... and
then go from there..... I call that "Point of View" of (moral or
ethical) predicated values. I am also interested what you, twonickles
may have to contribute to this question of "point of view" in this
case from an "anthropological" standpoint.... I hear that many native
Indian tribes and eskmos in particular have a differeent "value
system"...
I tell ya.... what with "Prompted", "Point of View", "Underscored",
and on and on.... I have been plagiarized & "ripped off" so often that
if I had a nickel for each instance I would probably be a
millionaire....
Anyway.... this is an "aside".... I was thinking, twonickles.... what
do you know about the story of "Snow White and the Seven Dwarves"....
We have already done the overall "Apple" dialectic of signs that, with
modifications, might be used to deal with (at least) one deception
that happens in the Snow White story.... the "poisoned apple".... How
would you say that deception is carried out.... what "aspect" of the
"language sign" is altered and in what way..... etc.
Hello, Twonickles, CC, Brtangel, Rockybottom &Y'all.... I couldn't let
the MANSTER thing go without an "addendum"... such a fine "thematic
dialectic" deserves some further consideration.... if not discussion.
(Y'all don't seem to appreciate the "ingenuity" of the thing). Look at
it again then consider my questions.
****
..................Husband or Wife...................
fidelity...........................have sex with mate
love...............................monogamy
..................MANSTER or Mistress...............
infidelity.........................have sex with others
lust...............................polygamy or promiscuity
Now.... if we put that in a "square" it comes out like so:
(Concept based disposition, notice)
love/monogamy......................lust/promiscuity
love/promiscuity...................lust/ monogamy
****
Twonickles, CC and the ladies: question: would y'all say that you are
a particular sort of....
A. Wife...............D. Mistress
B. Witress............C. Misife
Brtangel, Rockybottom and gentlemen: would y'all say that you are a
particular sort of....
A. Husband............D. Manster
B. Huster.............C. Manband
Now... (if y'all choose to answer).... the next question might be....
are y'all tellin' the truth????
nominal9
(just messin' with y'all....maybe)
nominal9
"married".... and they decide to "invite" Snow White's wicked queen
stepmother to the wedding..... This wedding ceremony intorduces
another "love" Thematic Dialectic which can be tentatively ( ie., by
"implication") rendered as follows:
wedding celebration / public feast........ ......tryst rendezvous /
secluded meal
GOOD / GOOD.........................................BAD / BAD
wedding celebration / secluded meal..........tryst rendezvous / public
feast
GOOD / BAD.............................................BAD / GOOD
It is understood and to be expected that the wedding of Snow White and
the prince will be a (I-A: GOOD /GOOD wedding celebration / public
feast) affair. Everything out in the "open" and everyone... in the
"know"....
http://www.pitt.edu/~dash/grimm053.html
"Their wedding was planned with great splendor and majesty.
Snow-White's godless stepmother was also invited to the feast. After
putting on her beautiful clothes she stepped before her mirror and
said:
Mirror, mirror, on the wall,
Who in this land is fairest of all?
The mirror answered:
You, my queen, are fair; it is true.
But the young queen is a thousand times fairer than you.
The wicked woman uttered a curse, and she became so frightened, so
frightened, that she did not know what to do. At first she did not
want to go to the wedding, but she found no peace. She had to go and
see the young queen. When she arrived she recognized Snow-White, and
terrorized, she could only stand there without moving.
Then they put a pair of iron shoes into burning coals. They were
brought forth with tongs and placed before her. She was forced to step
into the red-hot shoes and dance until she fell down dead.".
But what are we "readers" to make of the treatment that the wicked
queen received at the hands of Snow White and the prince..... I
mean.... she was "invited" to a wedding and winds up being forced to
dance herself to death.... Was that e "nice" thing for Snow White and
the prince to do to the wicked queen..... and was it....... "honest"?
One of the readers on the Yahoo site (twonickles), a few months back,
suggested that this was a Fifth Deception that was carried out by Snow
White and the prince, only in this instance the deception was directed
against the wicked queen. What do you think?....I think that she
(twonickles) was partly correct.... but not entirely. I will give
y'all my take on this ....next time.
nominal9
nominal9
or I have, for some unknown reason, been stopped from posting it....
I don't think there was anything even remotely questionable about
it.... I will try again. Regarding the "invitation of the wicked queen
to the wedding ceremony by Snow White and the prince. I suggested that
this course of action introduced the following two "matched pair" of
thematic dialectics into the story line.... as follows:
first matched dialectic
guest / invite......... pest / bar
GOOD / GOOD ....BAD / BAD
guest / bar............pest / invite
GOOD / BAD........BAD / GOOD
second matched dialectic
prosecution / capture.....relinquishment / let escape
GOOD / GOOD..............BAD / BAD
prosecution / let escape.... relinquishment / capture
GOOD / BAD......................BAD / BAD
I then suggest the following.... that Snow White and the prince
knowingly lie and only tell the wicked queen that she has been invited
to the wedding, as a pretext to lure her to her, also lied about,
prosecution and capture. In terms of my NOMINAL 9 THEMATIC DIALECTLIC
LOGIC approach, I would say that the "matched" applied sign schemes
and the pertinent communication language sign schemes are the
following:
first matched dialectic
[prince / prince][agent / patient]
pest / invite (actual Applied Sign scheme)
BAD / BAD
....
FACT / FACT
CONCEAL / CONCEAL
[prince / prince][possessor/ communicator]
guest / invite (communicated "lie" Language Sign Scheme)
GOOD / GOOD
----------------
second matched dialectic
[prince / prince][agent / patient]
prosecution / capture (actual Applied Sign scheme)
GOOD / GOOD
.....
FACT / FACT
CONCEAL / CONCEAL
[prince / prince] [possessor / communicator]
relinquishment / let escape (communicated "lie" language sign scheme)
BAD / BAD
So, what we have here is a matched pair of what I "short-habd " label
as
Wz languauge sign schemes... Structurally. this Wz pattern is
identical to the three deception patterns that the wicked queen used
when she was "disguising" herself as an old peddler woman, in order to
get close enough to attempt to kill Snow White, as we have seen. The
point here is.... was the wicked queen "taken in" by this "matched
pair" of deceptions. As "addressee" did the wicked queen actually
"believe" that she was a "welcome" guest to the wedding and that she
had really succeeded in escaping the "retirbution for her crime of
murder (or attempted murder)..... What exactly, did the wicked queen
know of the actual state of affairs pertinent to the tale..... Did the
Magic Mirror , "tip her off"? I sugest yes, but y'all decide for
yourselves.... I will continue my analysis, next time..... If I can
still get on here...
nominal9
nominal9
prosecution / capture.....relinquishment / let escape
GOOD / GOOD..............BAD / BAD
prosecution / let escape.... relinquishment / capture
GOOD / BAD......................BAD / BAD (wrong..... GOOD)
Aside from the usual run of the mill typos.... which I am not "anal"
enough about to fret over.... I was lax and , by repetitive habit,
just wrote the value judgment BAD when I should have written the value
judgment GOOD, above....It should have been obviously in error to
anyone who understands the contrary/ contradictory logical
relationships established by Aristotle's "Square of Opposition"....
but I correct it for those who may have been confused, in any case.
"After putting on her beautiful clothes she stepped before her mirror
and
said:
Mirror, mirror, on the wall,
Who in this land is fairest of all?
The mirror answered:
You, my queen, are fair; it is true.
But the young queen is a thousand times fairer than you.
The wicked woman uttered a curse, and she became so frightened, so
frightened, that she did not know what to do. At first she did not
want to go to the wedding, but she found no peace."
So, as I was saying.... was the wicked queen taken in by Snow White
and the prince's matched pair of "sought" deceptions? Did the wicked
queen really "believe" that she was truly a "Guest.... invited" to
attend the wedding and did the wicked queen also really "believe" that
she had been allowed "Relinquishment... and let escape" for her four
attempts to kill Snow White? Well, I say.... myself (and I think the
text bears out...let's say that, at first, the queen may well have
been "gullible" and been taken in by the "matched sought
deceptions".... after all the queen did put on her beautiful clothes
and seemed to prepare by"getting Gussied Up" for the Shin Dig
Wedding..... but then, she "consulted her magic mirror. who seems to
have set her straight. Up to now, the mirror had acknowledged the
wicked queen to have been the most beautiful of all, as long as Snow
White was in her poison apple stupor.... Now, however, with Snow White
awake, the mirror once again "Speaks The Truth To Authority" and
says... tough luck, wicked queen, the new queen to be is a thousand
times fairer than you. But, the Magic Mirro fails to say that this
queen to be is Snow White, some may object..... poppycock and
quibbling trifles, I say.... the queen wsas well enough aware, I
submit, that Snow White, somehow was back.... but I won't shoot anyone
who disagrees with me and rather wants to maintain that the two
matched sought deceptions did really work on the wicked queen, and she
attended the wedding of Snow White and the prince as an unwitting
dupe...but then.... HOW DO Y'ALL ACCOUNT FOR THE TEXTUAL EVIDENCE
THAT...
The wicked woman uttered a curse, and she became so frightened, so
frightened, that she did not know what to do. At first she did not
want to go to the wedding, but she found no peace." ????
nominal9
nominal9
White need the active paricipation of the wicked queen in order for
their projected course of action of Prosecuting and capturing her to
be effected. But now that the wicked queen is , I submit, "aware" of
the actual plan against her "wicked" self-interests.... will the
wicked queen comply, and, if so, WHY???? The question and point
being.... for her part.... what course of action does the wicked queen
instate , at the Applied Sign Plane, now. First, it was textually
noted that the wicked queen dressed herself in her beautriful clothes,
in initial preparation to attend the wedding.... this course of action
on the part of the wicked queen, as agent and patient, recalled the
previously noted (I-D: BAD / BAD vanity / adorn) Applied Sign that was
instated before by Snow White upon purchasing the bodice lace, only
here it is the queen who is vain and adorns herself with her beautiful
clothing. But then, the Magic Mirror informed the wicked queen that
she was, once more, no longer the "fairest of all"....At that point,
the wicked queen then "uttered a curse". this course of action on the
part of the wicked queen introduces the following thematic dialectic
into the story line:
angry dismay / curse................... approval / laud
BAD/ BAD...................................GOOD / GOOD
angry dismay / laud......................approval / curse
BAD / GOOD...............................GOOD / BAD
So, the queen also adds another instated (I-D: BAD / BAD angry dismay/
curse) Applied Sign, as agent and patient, to her courses of action.
Next the text says that the wicked queen :
"became so frightened, so
frightened, that she did not know what to do. At first she did not
want to go to the wedding, but she found no peace."
This ... "reaction sequence" on the part of the wicked queen
introduces two more thematic dialectics into the tale, which are as
follows:
fear / cower............... courage / confront
BAD/ BAD.................GOOD / GOOD
fear / confront.............courage / cower
BAD / GOOD..............GOOD / BAD
and
imprudence / go anyway........ foreboding / stay away
BAD / BAD.............................GOOD / GOOD
imprudence / stay away.........foreboding / go anyway
BAD / GOOD..........................GOOD / BAD
So, the wicked queen also adopted a (I-D; BAD / BAD fear / cower)
Applied Sign scheme into her overall course of action. This
particular thematic dialectic has been seen before in this overall
tale, but this is the first time that I have placed it explicitly in a
thematic square. The more important adopted Applied Sign scheme here,
though, is the (I-D: BAD / BAD imprudence / go anyway) course of
action that the wicked queen pursues.... All of which leads us to
conclude that the wicked queen participated.... willingly(?) and
knowingly(?) .... in her own eventual demise..... What say you
readers?
nominal9
nominal9
wedding of the prince and Snow wWhite, despite her apparent
"awareness" of the obstacles to her own safety and self-interest that
the said course of action .... "foreboded"? Well, the text explains
the wicked queen's "rationale" and its "result" as follows:
"but she found no peace. She had to go and
see the young queen. When she arrived she recognized Snow-White, and
terrorized, she could only stand there without moving."
dialectic....which I suggest is the following:
morbid curiosity / gape..................... horror / don't look
BAD / BAD.......................................GOOD / GOOD
morbid curiosity / don't look................horror / gape
BAD / GOOD.....................................GOOD / BAD
It is a matter of morbid curiosity, I suggest, for the wicked queen.
It is like a car wreck, one knows what the possible consequences of
seeing the sight are, and although most casual goers-by have no real
interest or cause to watch the scene.... they just have to slow down
to a crawl and rubber-neck.... even if it will only lead to another
car wreck due to a rear end collision..... Human Nature? maybe for
some..... Anyway.... one more associated (I-D: BAD / BAD morbid
curiosity / gape ) Applied Sign scheme course of action is instated
here, as agent and patient, by the wicked queen in this overalll
"moment" of the event.
By the way.... the reader should also notice the associated (I-D:
BAD / BAD fear/ cower) Applied Sign scheme that is instated by the
wicked queen, here, in the textual quote that the wicked
queen ..."terrorized, she could only stand there without moving".
So, that't the end of the wicked queen's reaction sequence, here....
now the ball goes back to the other characters.... next time.
nominal9
nominal9
are some thematic dialectics to consider. But first, let's recall the
actual text of the tale to which, I suggest, these thematic dialectics
apply:
"Then they put a pair of iron shoes into burning coals. They were
brought forth with tongs and placed before her. She was forced to
step
into the red-hot shoes and dance until she fell down dead.".
justice / guilty pays............avoidance / guilty gains
GOOD / GOOD...................BAD / BAD
justice / guilty gains............avoidance / guilty pays
GOOD / BAD......................BAD / GOOD
----------
censure / punish.................debauchery / indulge
GOOD / GOOD...................BAD / BAD
censure / indulge.................debauchery / punish
GOOD / BAD.......................BAD / GOOD
---------------
probity / allow due pain...................decadence / only pleasure
GOOD / GOOD............................BAD / BAD
probity / only pleasure...................decadence / allow due pain
GOOD / BAD................................BAD / GOOD
---------------
I think that, as agents and patients, both the prince and Snow White
(as well as, by extension, all of "good" society with them), have
decided to hand down "just retribution" upon the wicked queen, who is
the recitient of the said overall "justice". That is to say.... by
implication, mostly..... the prince and Snow White instate the
following associated (I-A: GOOD /GOOD ... justice / guilty pays....
censure / punish... probity/ allow due pain) Applied Sign schemes. The
instrument of their retribution is going to be red-hot the burning
shoes.... Now there's a novel "composite thing".... not surprising in
this context, I would say, and on a par with the "Larotte".... the
"Comarrow" and the "poisoned apple". We readers are treated to the
combination of a "Shoe" on the one hand and a Red hot "poker" or a
"branding Iron" on the other hand.... So, let's construct some Ockham
sign "triangles" for these two objects.....
................Shoe.................
Foot Protection....... Fitted leather
Comfort....................Cool
------------
..............Burning Poker............
Torture Device..........Red -Hot Iron
----------
Well, those are the "Iron Shoe" components, alright..... and, in terms
of "harmfulness" the distinction between them is obvious.... Shoes are
a harmless boon and red hot pokers are a harmful danger.... But that
doesn't really get into the question of "moral or ethical predicated
values" in the context of this tale.... does it? Mull it over for a
while, until next time.
nominal9
Gareth Gummow
perfectly logical. seriously! That was brilliant! Keep posting if you can.
_________________________________________________________________
New Windows Live Hotmail is here. Upgrade for free and get a better look.
www.newhotmail.ca?icid=WLHMENCA150
nominal9
Thank you for your kind words. I am sorry that I haven't been around
for a while to continue this "thematic" analysis of mine.... laziness
on my part coupled with a bit of "melancholy" regarding some of the
circumstances surrounding this whole endeavour.
Anyway, in my last entry I left you and any other readers with a
question to ponder (or consider.... not wanting to sound too
ostentatious). How are we to place the "Applied Sign dialectic"
regarding the Red Hot Shoes into a logical square of opposition? In
terms of the "harmfulness " of the pertinent "objects" the logical
square of opposition would appear as follows...
Foot Protection / Leather....... Torture Device / Hot Iron
COMFORT / COMFORT.........PAIN / PAIN
Foot Protection / Hot Iron.......Torture Device / Leather
COMFORT / PAIN.................PAIN / COMFORT
Under this crirteria.... the Red Hot Shoes comprise a [I-B COMFORT /
PAIN, Foot Protection / Hor Iron, Applied Sign] object. But how about
at the "level of "Moral or Ethical Predicated values? How are we
readers to "assess", as a value judgment, whether the action of
forcing the wicked queen to step into the Red Hot Shoes was either all
or partly GOOD or BAD? What "Moral or Ethical" predicated values [GOOD
vs. BAD] would you, the individual reader, assign to each pole of the
noted logical square of opposition, in this case.... what are your own
"preferences" or your own judgments?
Foot Protection / Hot Iron.... Torture Device / Leather
? / ?....................................? / ?
Foot Protection / Leather.....Torture Device / Hot Iron
? / ?...................................? / ?
Now, the important question for me, as a "semi-professional and
diligent reader", however, is NOT what I myself may "prefer" to think
but rather .... What are the Moral or Ethical Value Judgments that the
"authors" of the Snow White Tale wanted to assign to this (and all of
the other) Applied Sign dialectic(s) in this tale... whomever you may
choose to identify the "authorts" to be? I think that the "authors"
would have "assigned the following Moral or Ethical Predicated values
to this Applied Sign Dialectic...in this particular specific instance,
mind you.
Foot Protection / Hot Iron....Torture Device / Leather
GOOD / GOOD..................BAD / BAD
Foot Protection / Leather...Torture Device / Hot Iron
GOOD / BAD....................BAD / GOOD
Which is to say... in terms of "contextual" Moral or Ethical
Predicated Values... the same Red Hot Shoes comprises a
[I-A GOOD / GOOD, Foot Protection / Hot Iron, Applied Sign] object....
Therefore, as both agents and patients, at the Applied Sign Plane.
the prince and Snow White instated a course of action of forcing the
wicked queen, as recipient, to step into the Red Hot Shoes and dance
herself to death... This said instated course of action, from a
"harmfulness" standpoint was of the [I-B] variety but from the Moral
standpoint was of the [I-A] variety.
Well, that pretty much ends the textual analysis of the tale, as such.
There are a couple of other "thematic" dialectics that could be
considered.... such as the interplay between "magic" and "'religion"
within the tale..... but I will leave that up for further discussion
only if anyone is interested in exploring it .... this is a very
"sketchy" question, in terms of actual "textual" indications within
the written tale. Now.... at this point.... my "analytical method" can
also proced by establishing the locus of responsibility for every
phase and "moment " of the overall event and then assigning either
praise and blame for each instance to the pertinent tale character....
this whole question of distributed praise or blame has pertinence to
all Applied Sign and Language Sign schemes.... And I could also
introduce you all to another facet of my NOMINAL9 THEMATIC DIALECTIC
LOGIC... the question of "underscored resolutional outcomes".... but
that is all really much more involved in terms of needed
methodological information for you to understand what I am getting
at.... not that it is all that hard for anyone to understand, mind
you.... but perhaps just "tedious" to have to slog through to get
there....
Well maybe next time I will try to do some more.... or just summarize
and "recap"..... It depends....
Thanks for listening, and I hope you all have garnered some useful
"framework", in any event....
nominal9
nominal9
I guess I can add some more..... "Method".... to my copyrighted
NOMINAL9 THEMATIC DIALECTIC LOGIC. If anyone has been paying
attention, they may have noticed that I mentioned, in a few places
above< that there are basicallytwo "modes of disposition" of Ockham's
"Appied Signs" within Aristotle's Square of Opposition. One "Mode of
Disposition" is "Concept Based" in that it gives precedence to the
postioning of the Applied Sign- Conept aspect of the overall sign.
The other "Mode of Disposition" is "Reference Based" in that it gives
precedence to the positioning of the Applied Sign- Reference aspect of
the overall sign. Allow me to try to render these two "Modes of
Dispositions", here:
SET I - Concept Based
Concept / Reference........ Concept / Reference
A.shoe / leather................D.torture tool / iron
GOOD / GOOD................BAD / BAD
Concept / Reference.........Concept / Reference
B.shoe / iron....................C.torture / leather
GOOD / BAD...................BAD / GOOD
Notice, in this SET I Disposition, the two "subcontraries" are
alligned UNDER the "primary contraries" within Aristotle's Square on
the basis of a logical contraposition considered to treat the
"concept" aspect of the overall Applied Sign.... B. is under A......
C. is under D.
______
SET II - Reference Based
Concept / Reference.........Concept / Reference
A.shoe / leather................D.torturte tool / iron
GOOD / GOOD ...............BAD / BAD
Concept / Reference.........Concept / Reference
C. torture tool/ leather.......B.shoe / iron
BAD / GOOD...................GOOD / BAD
Notice, the difference is that, in this SET II Disposition, the two
"subcontraries" are aligned UNDER the "primary contraries" within
Aristotle's Square on thre basis of a logical contraposition
considered to treat the "reference" aspect of the overall Applied
Sign.... C. is under A. ..... B. is under D.
_____
BOTH of these Modes of Opposition are EQUALLY VALID.... there is no
"better or worse" between them from a "methodological standpoint"....
but it will be seen that they do give rise to different UNDERSCORED
RESOLUTIONAL OUTCOMES...
By the way... please try to figure out on your own that each one of
the "variations" in Applied Sign could be placed in the "Lead"
posotion within Aristotle's Square (i.e., upper Left, looking head on)
and you could and would still come up with a Valid Disposition under
Both Set I or Set II.... So, the total number of variations of
Disposition for these Aristotle Squares would be eight.... Four Set
I.... and Four Set II... for each and every (or whatever) Thematic
Dialectic Of Signs were under consideration.
nominal9
> > New Windows Live Hotmail is here. Upgrade for free and get a better look.www.newhotmail.ca?icid=WLHMENCA150- Hide quoted text -
nominal9
A couple of corrections as to my own "copyrighted" terminology.... I
said, in the previous post, that there were two "Modes of
Disposition".... well I should have called them " Formats of
Disposition" in order to agree with the termionology that I use in my
copyrighted materials.... I was getting a bit ahead of myself and
thinking of "Modes of Resolution", as well. Also, I hope that I did
not unduly confuse anyone by using the particular [Shoe / Leather vs
Torture Device / Hot Iron] thematic dialectic as an example in the
prior post.... As was seen... the actual "moral predicated values" for
this thematic set were different from the "Harm" predicated values....
I used the Harm predicated values in my example above since that is
the set of "predicated values" that most people consider as being
applicable first.
So, anyway... here are the total number of possible Format Of
Disposition variations for the moral predicated value of the Applied
Sign in both the Set I and the Set II format of disposition....
Set I (Concept Based)
I-A
Concept / Reference............ Concept / Reference
GOOD / GOOD....................BAD /BAD
Concept / Reference.............Concept / Reference
GOOD / BAD.......................BAD / GOOD
I-B
Concept / Reference.............Concept / Reference
GOOD /BAD........................BAD / GOOD
Concept / Refernce..............Concept / Reference
GOOD / GOOD....................BAD / BAD
I-C
Concept / Reference............Concept / Reference
BAD / GOOD......................GOOD / BAD
Concept / Reference............Concept / Reference
BAD / BAD.........................GOOD / GOOD
I-D
Concept / Reference ...........Concept / Reference
BAD / BAD.........................GOOD / GOOD
Concept / Reference............Concept / Reference
BAD / GOOD......................GOOD / BAD
___
Set II (Reference Based)
II-A
Concept / Reference...........Concept / Reference
GOOD / GOOD..................BAD / BAD
Concept / Reference..........Concept / Reference
BAD / GOOD....................GOOD / BAD
II-B
Concept / Reference.........Concept / Reference
GOOD / BAD...................BAD / GOOD
Concept / Reference.........Concept / Reference
BAD / BAD......................GOOD / GOOD
II-C
Concept / Reference........Concept / Reference
BAD / GOOD..................GOOD / BAD
Concept / Reference........Concept / Reference
GOOD / GOOD...............BAD / BAD
II-D
Concept / Reference........Concept / Reference
BAD / BAD.....................GOOD / GOOD
Concept / Reference........Concept / Reference
GOOD / BAD..................BAD / GOOD
____
So, those are the total eight... four in Set I "Format".... and four
more in set Set II "Format".... number of my modified Ockham' s
applied sign "Dispositions" that are "logically" possible when they
are placed within Aristotle"s Square of Opposition.....
Of course, keep in mind that this variation on the use of both
Ockham's and Aristotle' s basic notions is MY OWN ORIGINAL
CREATION.... do not be thievin' plagiarizin' popinjay parrrots....
always give credit "and authorship" where it is due.... this is my
"stuff".... So... maybe next time I will get into the Modes of
Resolution part of this.... That's my own "twist" on some things ,
too....
nominal9
> > > New Windows Live Hotmail is here. Upgrade for free and get a better look.www.newhotmail.ca?icid=WLHMENCA150-Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
nominal9
.......Positive......................................................................Negative
Set I Format
I-A
C(GOOD) /
R(GOOD).........................................C(GOOD) / R(GOOD)
+C(BAD) /....R(GOOD)........................................-
C(BAD) /....R(GOOD)
Underscored Resolutional Outcomes.... single "aspect" of Applied Sign
.......................R(GOOD).........................................C(GOOD)...........
I-B
C(GOOD) /
R(BAD)............................................C(GOOD) / R(BAD)
+C(BAD) /....R(BAD)...........................................-
C(BAD) / ...R(BAD)
Underscored Resolutional Outcomes.... single "aspect" of Applied Sign
.......................R(BAD)............................................C(GOOD).............
I-C
C(BAD) /....R(GOOD)..........................................C(BAD) /....R(GOOD)
+C(GOOD) / R(GOOD).........................................-
C(GOOD) / R(GOOD)
Underscored Resolutional Outcomes.... single "aspect" of Applied Sign
.......................R(GOOD)..........................................C(BAD)......
I-D
C(BAD) /....R(BAD)..............................................C(BAD) /....R(BAD)
+C(GOOD) / R(BAD).............................................-
C(GOOD) / R(BAD)
Underscorted Rresolutional Outcomes.... single "aspect" of Applied
Sign
.......................R(BAD)..............................................C(BAD)
Set II Format
II-A
C(GOOD) /
R(GOOD)............................................C(GOOD) / R(GOOD)
+C(GOOD) / R(BAD)..............................................-
C(GOOD) / R(BAD)
Underscored Resolutional Outcomes.... single "aspect" of Applied Sign
C(GOOD)...............................................................................R(GOOD)
II-B
C(GOOD) /
R(BAD)................................................C(GOOD) / R(BAD)
+C(GOOD) / R(GOOD)............................................-
C(GOOD) / R(GOOD)
Underscored Resolutional Outcomes.... single "aspect" of Applied Sign
C(GOOD)...............................................................................R(BAD)
II-C
C(BAD) /....R(GOOD).............................................C(BAD) /....R(GOOD)
+C(BAD) /....R(BAD)...............................................-
C(BAD) /....R(BAD)
Underscored Resolutional Outcomes.... single "aspect" of Applied Sign
C(BAD)...................................................................................R(GOOD)
II-D
C(BAD) /....R(BAD).................................................C(BAD) /....R(BAD)
+C(BAD) /....R(GOOD).............................................-
C(BAD) /....R(GOOD)
Underscored Resolutional Outcomes.... single "aspect" of Applied Sign
C(BAD)...................................................................................R(BAD)
I really do hope that these "diagramed" addition and subtraction
"metaphors" come through this writing program okay. So, if they do
show up properly.... I would ask any possible readers of this to
notice that each and every Applied Sign "Format Of Resolution" (either
Set I or Set II) under both possible "Modes of Mesolution" (either
positive or negative) serves to underscore a single "Aspect" of the
two-part Applied Sign that is in primary position in my modified
Aristotle's Square of Opposition. Perhaps the first of many (reader)
questions at this point is... what constitutes either a positive or a
negative mode of resolution in the course of any instated appleid sign
course of action in a narrative or story line?.... Well, for starters,
I want the reader to consider ONLY whether the said course of action
(or Applied Sign) is SUCCESSFUL in its implementation.... if "yes"
then it is a positive.... if "no" then it is a negative.... But I will
have to specify and qualify this further later on....
nominal9
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
nominal9
programs and the prior post was not properly aligned. I have tried to
make corrections below.... I hope this one works and the "column"
structure that I want to render shows.... wish me luck...
nominal9
On Aug 2, 6:23 pm, nominal9 <nomin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Modes of Resolution....
.......Positive............................................................Negative
Set I Format
I-A
....C(GOOD) / R(GOOD)...............................C(GOOD) / R(GOOD)
..+C(BAD) /....R(GOOD)..............................-
C(BAD) /....R(GOOD)
Underscored Resolutional Outcomes.... single "aspect" of Applied Sign
.....................R(GOOD)...............................C(GO
OD)...........
I-B
.....C(GOOD) / R(BAD)..................................C(GOOD) /
R(BAD)
...+C(BAD) /....R(BAD).................................-
C(BAD) / ...R(BAD)
Underscored Resolutional Outcomes.... single "aspect" of Applied Sign
......................R(BAD)..................................C(
GOOD).............
I-C
.....C(BAD) /....R(GOOD)................................C(BAD) /....R(GOOD)
...+C(GOOD) / R(GOOD)...............................-C(GOOD) / R(GOOD)
Underscored Resolutional Outcomes.... single "aspect" of Applied Sign
......................R(GOOD)................................C(B
AD)......
I-D
......C(BAD) /....R(BAD)..................................C(BAD) /....R(BAD)
....+C(GOOD) / R(BAD).................................-C(GOOD) /
R(BAD)
Underscorted Rresolutional Outcomes.... single "aspect" of Applied
Sign
.......................R(BAD)..................................C(BAD)
Set II Format
II-A
.......C(GOOD) / R(GOOD)................................C(GOOD) /
R(GOOD)
.....+C(GOOD) / R(BAD)..................................-C(GOOD) /
R(BAD)
Underscored Resolutional Outcomes.... single "aspect" of Applied Sign
.......C(GOOD)..................................................................R(GOOD)
II-B
.......C(GOOD) / R(BAD)....................................C(GOOD) /
R(BAD)
.....+C(GOOD) / R(GOOD)................................-C(GOOD) /
R(GOOD)
Underscored Resolutional Outcomes.... single "aspect" of Applied Sign
........C(GOOD)...................................................................R(BAD)
II-C
........C(BAD) /....R(GOOD).................................C(BAD) /....R(GOOD)
......+C(BAD) /....R(BAD)..................................-
C(BAD) /....R(BAD)
Underscored Resolutional Outcomes.... single "aspect" of Applied Sign
........C(BAD)......................................................................R(GOOD)
II-D
........C(BAD) /....R(BAD).....................................C(BAD) /....R(BAD)
......+C(BAD) /....R(GOOD).................................-
C(BAD) /....R(GOOD)
Underscored Resolutional Outcomes.... single "aspect" of Applied Sign
.......C(BAD).........................................................................R(BAD)
nominal9
take, last time, so I tried again, now... I hope the " addition and
subtraction" column structure came through, this time. Actually, it is
just a Diagram metaphor that serves to identify the resultant
Underscored Resolutional Outcomes in the case each and every possible
Applied Sign Scheme.... but the results DO NOT depend on the logic os
mathematics, per se.... those are the actual results that happen to be
the case.... of course the same can be said for the logic of
mathematics..... the fact that 1+1=2 just happens to be the case in
and of itself.... and it is not a result that is dictated by the logic
of mathematics..... Bona Fide logic works the other way around..... A
POSTERIORI... 1+1=2 IN EXPERIENCE FIRST.... and then, later, the
logic of math says.... "okay, that makes sense".....and invents number
systems and the math to STATE THE OBVIOUS..... right, ya silly
phenomenologists????
Lt's hope the corrections below, work, now.
On Aug 2, 7:26 pm, nominal9 <nomin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Of course, as usual, I have a terrible time with these word processor
programs and the prior post was not properly aligned. I have tried to
make corrections below.... I hope this one works and the "column"
structure that I want to render shows.... wish me luck...
nominal9
On Aug 2, 6:23 pm, nominal9 <nomin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Modes of Resolution....
.......Positive............................................................Negative
Set I Format
I-A
...C(GOOD) / R(GOOD)...........................C(GOOD) / R(GOOD)
.+C(BAD) /....R(GOOD).........................- C(BAD) /....R(GOOD)
Underscored Resolutional Outcomes.... single "aspect" of Applied Sign
....................R(GOOD)...........................C(GO
OD)...........
I-B
....C(GOOD) / R(BAD)............................C(GOOD) /> R(BAD)
..+C(BAD) /....R(BAD)..........................- C(BAD) / ...R(BAD)
Underscored Resolutional Outcomes.... single "aspect" of Applied Sign
.....................R(BAD)...........................C(
GOOD).............
I-C
....C(BAD) /....R(GOOD)........................C(BAD) /....R(GOOD)
..+C(GOOD) / R(GOOD).......................-C(GOOD) / R(GOOD)
Underscored Resolutional Outcomes.... single "aspect" of Applied Sign
.....................R(GOOD)........................C(BAD)......
I-D
.....C(BAD) /....R(BAD)..........................C(BAD) /....R(BAD)
...+C(GOOD) / R(BAD).........................-C(GOOD) / R(BAD)
Underscorted Resolutional Outcomes.... single "aspect" of Applied
Sign
......................R(BAD).........................C(BAD)
Set II Format
II-A
......C(GOOD) / R(GOOD).....................C(GOOD) / R(GOOD)
....+C(GOOD) / R(BAD).......................-C(GOOD) / R(BAD)
Underscored Resolutional Outcomes.... single "aspect" of Applied Sign
.......C(GOOD).......................................................R(GOOD)
II-B
......C(GOOD) / R(BAD)........................C(GOOD) / R(BAD)
....+C(GOOD) / R(GOOD)....................-C(GOOD) / R(GOOD)
Underscored Resolutional Outcomes.... single "aspect" of Applied Sign
......C(GOOD)......................................................R(BAD)
II-C
......C(BAD) /....R(GOOD)...................C(BAD) /....R(GOOD)
....+C(BAD) /....R(BAD).....................- C(BAD) /....R(BAD)
Underscored Resolutional Outcomes.... single "aspect" of Applied Sign
.....C(BAD)........................................................R(GOOD)
II-D
......C(BAD) /....R(BAD).......................C(BAD) /....R(BAD)
....+C(BAD) /....R(GOOD)...................- C(BAD) /....R(GOOD)
Underscored Resolutional Outcomes.... single "aspect" of Applied Sign
.....C(BAD)...........................................................R(BAD)
I really do hope that these "diagramed" addition and subtraction
"metaphors" come through this writing program okay. So, if they do
show up properly.... I would ask any possible readers of this to
notice that each and every Applied Sign "Format Of
Resolution" (either
Set I or Set II) under both possible "Modes of Mesolution" (either
positive or negative) serves to underscore a single "Aspect" of the
two-part Applied Sign that is in primary position in my modified
Aristotle's Square of Opposition. Perhaps the first of many (reader)
questions at this point is... what constitutes either a positive or a
negative mode of resolution in the course of any instated applied
nominal9
"math" column structure came through.... I think that most possible
readers will be able to make the necessary corrections to make full
sense of what I am getting at. Now, let me make another
"methodological" observation.... Do you-reders remember the discussion
that I began during the course of the Snow White tale analysis, above,
rergarding agents and patients and the question of Locus Of
Responsibility for the eventual instated courses of action instated by
the characters/people in the various "moments of the event"?
To refresh your memory, I observed that in the case of the
Huntsman.... had he followed the Wicked Queen's Agent suggested
course of action and killed Snow White the, the wicked queen, as
agent, would have been ultimately "responsible" for "ordering" the
said action. But when the Huntsman rebelled and instead chose to
release Snow White.... then the Huntsman, as patient, took
"responsibility", himself for his own decision. The same held later on
for Snow White when on three occassions she chose to disregard the
"counsel" given to her by the Dwarfs to be cautious and not allow
anyone into the house... in which case the Dwarfs, as agents, would
have been "responsible for the said counseled course of action.
However, when Snow White, as patient, instead chose for herself to let
the disguised Wicked Queen inside the house... well then Snow White
also assumed the responsibility for her own choice.
Now.... methodologically, the thing that I would like to introduce you
readers to now is the overall observation that, in my NOMINAL9
THEMATIC DIALECTIC LOGIC "system" (or whatever you want to call
it).... The AGENTS bear the Locus of Responsibility for all of the
specific modes of resolution and resultant outcomes for the Set I
Schemes. The PATIENTS bear the Locus of Responsibility for all of the
other specific modes of resolution and resultant outcomes of the Set
II Schemes.
Along with the said locus of resp[onsibility,,,, and depending upon
the MORAL PREDICATED VALUE of the underscored resolution outcome, in
each case, the "reader" can the proceed to make the related VALUE
JUDGMENT of distributing either PRAISE or BLAME on the responsible
character or person at issue for each "moment of the event".
Let me see if I can put this whole thing into some sort of
undserstandable "table" below... bear with me if I have trouble with
this writing program, however.... that seems to be my usual "luck"
with these word processors.... there is a lot to be said for good,
"old fashioned" typewriters....I think.
Scheme / Positive Outcome / Judgement / Negative Outcome / Judgment
SET I AGENTS ARE RESPONSIBLE
I-
A......../......R(GOOD)......../..PRAISE..../..C(GOOD)............./..PRAISE
I-
B......../......R(BAD).........../..BLAME...../..C(GOOD)............./..PRAISE
I-
C......../......R(GOOD)......../..PRAISE..../..C(BAD)................./..BLAME
I-
D......../......R(BAD).........../..BLAME...../..C(BAD)................./..BLAME
SET II PATIENTS ARE RESPONSIBLE
II-
A......./.......C(GOOD)......../..PRAISE.../..R(GOOD).............../..PRAISE
II-
B......./........C(GOOD)......./..PRAISE.../..R(BAD)................../..BLAME
II-
C......./.......C(BAD).........../..BLAME..../..R(GOOD).............../..PRAISE
II-
D......./.......C(BAD).........../..BLAME..../..R(BAD)................../..BLAME
Hope the table structure holds... Now, the next step is to go back
through the previous Snow White tale analysis and distribue the praise
or blame accordingly.... and see if you readers agree with my
"method's" results....
nominal9
> .......C(GOOD).......................................................R(GOOD)
> II-B
> ......C(GOOD) / R(BAD)........................C(GOOD) / R(BAD)
> ....+C(GOOD) / R(GOOD)....................-C(GOOD) / R(GOOD)
> Underscored Resolutional Outcomes.... single "aspect" of Applied Sign
> ......C(GOOD)......................................................R(BAD)
> II-C
> ......C(BAD) /....R(GOOD)...................C(BAD) /....R(GOOD)
> ....+C(BAD) /....R(BAD).....................- C(BAD) /....R(BAD)
> Underscored Resolutional Outcomes.... single "aspect" of Applied Sign
> .....C(BAD)........................................................R(GOOD)
> II-D
> ......C(BAD) /....R(BAD).......................C(BAD) /....R(BAD)
> ....+C(BAD) /....R(GOOD)...................- C(BAD) /....R(GOOD)
> Underscored Resolutional Outcomes.... single "aspect" of Applied Sign
> .....C(BAD)...........................................................R(BAD)