Definition Is Prior To Words III
2005.08.07 4:53

Again here is Morosoph's 'definition' on what symbiosis means.

Symbiosis is about unconscious flow. And we do this suprisingly well.

Apparently he is generalising here what the symbiosis means from his limited perception, again we don't have to know what symbiosis means, but we want to know what is symbiosis. Big difference. It is easy to know what symbiosis means but difficult to know what is symbiosis.

Despite its imperfections, and relative lack of regulation, we have many of our needs met for real by a near anarchic system of free exchange. It might not be the best of all possible worlds, but to say that symbiosis doesn't work is manifestly false.

All the statement here is purely based on his conviction, then so what?

Symbiosis isn't always good; it is a near synonym for "reciprocity", not perfection.

We want to know what is symbiosis and what is not, but he talked as if he knew what symbiosis is. Symbiosis he knew is based on his perception which is not likely to be the same as that of other people inevitably.

I think that it would be a lot better if people did act more freely, but the fact that they don't is proof of social symbiosis.

That's why I say he thinks therefore he thinks so. He is playing a word at best or he is making a mockery of us at worst. Between Morosoph and me, the term symbiosis is the same though definiton is entirely different. We share the definition of the words not the word itself that defines differently.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Definition Is Prior To Words III Preferences Top 8 comments Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold: -1: 8 comments 0: 8 comments 1: 8 comments 2: 4 comments 3: 0 comments 4: 0 comments 5: 0 comments Flat Nested No Comments Threaded Oldest First Newest First Highest Scores First Oldest First (Ignore Threads) Newest First (Ignore Threads) Save:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Symbiosis(Score:2)
by FidelCatsro (861135) <fidelcatsro.gmail@com> on 2005.08.07 6:20 (#13259930) (Last Journal: 2005.09.30 16:03)
To em and the dictionary means , A strengthening of an event gained by two organism working together, which is generally positive (to simplify).No matter how people try to twist the meaning of a word to fit context , it does not change to anyone but themselves--Non illigitamus carborundum, Graviora manent
Re:Symbiosis(Score:1)
by mercedo (822671) * on 2005.08.07 21:26 (#13263240) (http://slashdot.org/~mercedo/journal/109855 Last Journal: 2005.10.01 16:45)
Oh, thank you reading this scrible or draft anyway writing of apparently a rather poor quality, I wanted to finish commenting his last reply in my previous JE- perfect moderate but it was already 5:00 in the morning, I have needed to take a minimum least hours to sleep - about 2 hours so I just wrote down the most conspicous point that I noticed most. I usually do go the whole hog to talk to him, becuase all his comments and articles are so worthwhile to read and examine, as a matter of fact some of my articles were directly written based on his writings.
His writing is worthwhile because he perceives things very differently from -I must say- ours. So usually I faced very difficulty in understanding his idea. When he said to bestow some political power to the local entity leads to the way to corporatism, how many peole can understand what he is implying? I don't think anyone can understand, when he said ' reality is singular' many people must have thought it eh?
Morosoph and I are one of best friends one another like the relationship between Marxist Hacker 42 and I but the relationship between Marxist Hacker 42 and I are based on common knowledge or common sense we share and everybody shares, the relationship between Morosoph and me are connected in the tacit dimension that nobody can describe it yet- underlying nature behind the verbal or mathematical order so we understand the means other than signe.
When I talk to him, I feel extremely exuberant. I must say it is a pleasure of knowledge...I guess you've got some nature similar to that of us, I appreciate participating in our crossfire, scramble, blackhole...--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters [ Parent ]
It wasn't intended to be a definition...(Score:1)
by Morosoph (693565) on 2005.08.08 20:12 (#13268206) (http://homepage.ntlworld.com/tim.wesson/ Last Journal: 2005.09.17 20:46)
But an elucidation. See my reply in this journal below.--Why you Should use 'Viral' Licenses [slashdot.org] [ Parent ]
Re:It wasn't intended to be a definition...(Score:2)
by FidelCatsro (861135) <fidelcatsro.gmail@com> on 2005.08.09 1:21 (#13270381) (Last Journal: 2005.09.30 16:03)
Ah , I hadn't actually read the original JE yet, just the summary of thoughts . I will give it a once over--Non illigitamus carborundum, Graviora manent [ Parent ]
Ps.(Score:1)
by Morosoph (693565) on 2005.08.08 20:14 (#13268216) (http://homepage.ntlworld.com/tim.wesson/ Last Journal: 2005.09.17 20:46)
Good of the participants != best possible pairing, or good of the entire system.--Why you Should use 'Viral' Licenses [slashdot.org] [ Parent ]
Context(Score:2)
by Morosoph (693565) on 2005.08.08 20:10 (#13268194) (http://homepage.ntlworld.com/tim.wesson/ Last Journal: 2005.09.17 20:46)
In the context of social evolution, symbiosis is a naturally arising process. My discussion with MH42 in your earlier journal [slashdot.org] is where I disagree with his use of the word to mean that the entire system (of economics) optimises for the good of the people (which he claims that it doesn't, quite rightly). He also appears to be saying that symbiosis requires conscious and deliberate negotiation, but evolution, where we observe symbiosis, is not conscious, but unconscious; co-evolution without deliberateness.
Symbiosis can come about consciously, so I admit, I overstated myself in countering MH42's point, but I think that it is important to realise that symbiosis is usually spontaneous, and this is the quality that I am referring to in my argument against pure democracy.--Why you Should use 'Viral' Licenses [slashdot.org]
I Surrender(Score:1)
by mercedo (822671) * on 2005.08.11 0:29 (#13286448) (http://slashdot.org/~mercedo/journal/109855 Last Journal: 2005.10.01 16:45)
Unconditionally. I am unable to understand what you mean.--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters [ Parent ]
I'm Sorry(Score:2)
by Morosoph (693565) on 2005.08.11 6:45 (#13289533) (http://homepage.ntlworld.com/tim.wesson/ Last Journal: 2005.09.17 20:46)
I don't think that my use of language is especially unusual, but I do think that I make subtle distinctions that are hard to see sometimes.
Symbiosis [wikipedia.org] usually means a mutually beneficial process between two parties. It does not need to be the most beneficial process, nor does it need to be a part of the most beneficial system. It's simply better than not having that process. It isn't parasitical: neither party loses; rather they both gain. However, there could conceivably be a 'fairer' trade.
The liberal tradition is one of balancing interests and freedoms. Look at Liberalism Today [wikipedia.org] to see the process of reaching compromise over many positions.
There are many other examples, but I don't think that I'm misusing the language. It is a shame if you cannot make sense of what I write :-(--Why you Should use 'Viral' Licenses [slashdot.org]