From: Wade T.Smith (email@example.com)
Date: Thu 31 Oct 2002 - 12:16:02 GMT
On Thursday, October 31, 2002, at 03:09 , firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
> But if it leaves the head and is manifested in action, it was in the
> head to begin
> with. You deny its source, and rather mislabel its destination as
My motion through space is not in my head. I don't deny the source- but
you disregard the destination.
> It only takes one dancing choreographer to falsify your point.
There are many dancing choreographers. My point was only that they don't
_need_ to be. I was not making any point of exclusivity, but of inclusiveness. Again you failed to see this.
> To do it, we have to know it.
We have to know _something_ prior to performance, but do we know the
_actual_ performance until we _actually_ _do_ it? No, we do not, and I defy you to prove that we do. Double dog dare you. This would be the same thing as complete prediction of all possible futures, and, sorry, but we can't and don't do that.
If what you say were true, a 'spoonerism' would not be a fact in lany
This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu 31 Oct 2002 - 12:20:05 GMT