Hi Markus. I really enjoyed reading this. Yes, it is a muddled mess! Thank you for breaking it down as you have. As you may know, I see the solution in anti-nominalism. We need to respect and promote healthy semiosis. Not doing so has disastrous consequences. I often wonder if humanity is even capable of repairing the damage that has already been done. It makes me sad, but it also drives me to find ways to help others understand. Thanks for setting up this site. I look forward to your wonderful insights and to any and all dialogue on these topics.
Glad you liked the post! I wouldn't be so pessimistic. Although these times may seem dark at times, it is part of the process. Formation of new habits begins with the breaking of old ones. Furthermore, technology enables faster mediation of ideas and information, if it is used in the right manner.
I don't think I'm really that pessimistic, but I am definitely 'real'istic. :) ..... As you said, "if it is used in the right manner". There is a good bit of age difference between us, and I know you have never really known a world without all of the technology that we have today. I also live in the United States, so our perspectives are just enough different to be a positive thing when it comes to real dialogue. America was built on nominalism, and it's extremely rare to encounter anyone here who is not a nominalist-materialist-atheist or a staunch-nominalist-theist. I'm in Florida, where you can't throw a rock without hitting one. Lol. .. Now that you're on Twitter, you'll probably encounter more of that. But knowing you, I'm sure you will forge ahead regardless. :) ...... Perhaps you know of Mats Bergman? Here is an excerpt from his conclusion in 'Fields of Signification'. I appreciate his points here. ...... "In particular, semeiotic analysis could serve to show that certain communicative habits that we take for granted – that have become transparent for us – are in fact complex modes of sign action that can be criticised and perhaps even intelligently reformed. However, such amelioration ought to be carefully considered and gradual; there is simply no feasible way of performing a total revolution of our established practices. Neither should we take communicative transparency to be an evil that must be fought to the bitter end; if our modes of conduct would not be highly habitualised, they would require too much effort to be able to function properly. Our communicative habits, no matter how they come into being, display a tendency toward transparency. Hence, it is imperative that we recognise the limited but real possibility of self-control in view of such social ideals as reasonableness, truth, and communal understanding. Toward this end, semeiotic may even serve us in our lives."
You're right in that nominalist-materialist-atheist worldview is, and has been, the prevalent view. However, in my opinion, a great dissatisfaction towards that worldview is growing as we speak. People are hungry for new ways of living and understanding the reality.
Our culture is like a saturated liquid. As soon as even a drop of truth falls into it, it immediately begins to crystalize.
Markus, I appreciate your contribution very much. I celebrate your beautiful mind and authentic expression. Please don't mistake your interpretation of a worldview without inquiring the worldview that is seeing the looking. Gifting who we are becoming from an open participatory engagement is the generative value generation I experience from your contribution. That being said, I wonder if my contribution is appropriate ;)
I agree. I've been studying these topics for decades, and as you know, I was delighted when I discovered your YouTube channel when you first started it. I am always keeping an eye out for others who are working on these topics. We have made great progress in the past couple of decades, and that momentum is growing. It's wonderful! But we still have a long way to go, with many obstacles and challenges ahead. I often meet people who want to learn but have difficulty with understanding it. Changing cultural perspectives that have been ingrained for centuries is a formidable challenge. I think of myself as a floater, and I try to direct them to whatever source may work best for their learning style. This understanding cannot be limited to the ivory towers of academia. I know you know that, and that is why you work so hard on your videos. Your work is excellent. Twitter will present some new challenges, for sure. Keep up the good fight. ;-)
Hi Markus. I really enjoyed reading this. Yes, it is a muddled mess! Thank you for breaking it down as you have. As you may know, I see the solution in anti-nominalism. We need to respect and promote healthy semiosis. Not doing so has disastrous consequences. I often wonder if humanity is even capable of repairing the damage that has already been done. It makes me sad, but it also drives me to find ways to help others understand. Thanks for setting up this site. I look forward to your wonderful insights and to any and all dialogue on these topics.
Love by the way the concept of "healthy semiosis"
Glad you liked the post! I wouldn't be so pessimistic. Although these times may seem dark at times, it is part of the process. Formation of new habits begins with the breaking of old ones. Furthermore, technology enables faster mediation of ideas and information, if it is used in the right manner.
I don't think I'm really that pessimistic, but I am definitely 'real'istic. :) ..... As you said, "if it is used in the right manner". There is a good bit of age difference between us, and I know you have never really known a world without all of the technology that we have today. I also live in the United States, so our perspectives are just enough different to be a positive thing when it comes to real dialogue. America was built on nominalism, and it's extremely rare to encounter anyone here who is not a nominalist-materialist-atheist or a staunch-nominalist-theist. I'm in Florida, where you can't throw a rock without hitting one. Lol. .. Now that you're on Twitter, you'll probably encounter more of that. But knowing you, I'm sure you will forge ahead regardless. :) ...... Perhaps you know of Mats Bergman? Here is an excerpt from his conclusion in 'Fields of Signification'. I appreciate his points here. ...... "In particular, semeiotic analysis could serve to show that certain communicative habits that we take for granted – that have become transparent for us – are in fact complex modes of sign action that can be criticised and perhaps even intelligently reformed. However, such amelioration ought to be carefully considered and gradual; there is simply no feasible way of performing a total revolution of our established practices. Neither should we take communicative transparency to be an evil that must be fought to the bitter end; if our modes of conduct would not be highly habitualised, they would require too much effort to be able to function properly. Our communicative habits, no matter how they come into being, display a tendency toward transparency. Hence, it is imperative that we recognise the limited but real possibility of self-control in view of such social ideals as reasonableness, truth, and communal understanding. Toward this end, semeiotic may even serve us in our lives."
You're right in that nominalist-materialist-atheist worldview is, and has been, the prevalent view. However, in my opinion, a great dissatisfaction towards that worldview is growing as we speak. People are hungry for new ways of living and understanding the reality.
Our culture is like a saturated liquid. As soon as even a drop of truth falls into it, it immediately begins to crystalize.
Markus, I appreciate your contribution very much. I celebrate your beautiful mind and authentic expression. Please don't mistake your interpretation of a worldview without inquiring the worldview that is seeing the looking. Gifting who we are becoming from an open participatory engagement is the generative value generation I experience from your contribution. That being said, I wonder if my contribution is appropriate ;)
I agree. I've been studying these topics for decades, and as you know, I was delighted when I discovered your YouTube channel when you first started it. I am always keeping an eye out for others who are working on these topics. We have made great progress in the past couple of decades, and that momentum is growing. It's wonderful! But we still have a long way to go, with many obstacles and challenges ahead. I often meet people who want to learn but have difficulty with understanding it. Changing cultural perspectives that have been ingrained for centuries is a formidable challenge. I think of myself as a floater, and I try to direct them to whatever source may work best for their learning style. This understanding cannot be limited to the ivory towers of academia. I know you know that, and that is why you work so hard on your videos. Your work is excellent. Twitter will present some new challenges, for sure. Keep up the good fight. ;-)