Hi Bill,
You seem to be responding to several posts themselves somewhat separate in
time.
As to the first, I'm glad you like the Spencer Brown passage. I don't think
he was limiting himself to visual perception when he said "see" but I agree
that such a limitation would be absurd. I think he was using "see" as
something of a general category
You wrote: "Don't even think about sex. Don't go there. " I don't get what
you're saying. Is this in response to my comment about Kant's sexless
aesthetic? But in any event why wouldn't I want to think about sex? Do
tell.
As to the bunny reference, that came from the description of xmca I
serendipitously found on a search list. I thought it quite candid and
wondered later if someone on list hadn't written it. The idea of "discuss
with varying degrees of success" seemed to be such an everyday way of
expressing the situation with multilogues, their evanescent quality. But I
forgot that you have a bunny and had wondered about the bunny reference.
Now it comes back, you have previously used the bunny to problematize
certain ways of looking at observed behavior, motive, etc. as in the current
tale from the backyard. What kind of grass did that bunny eat anyway?
Paul H. Dillon
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jun 01 2000 - 01:01:38 PDT