This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01BF1FE0.76A6BD3C Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Matt: >> Suppose we did use a ternary system. Why wouldn't the defining >> principle still be presence vs. absence?" No, it wouldn't because there are 3 fundamental states in a tertiary system, not 2. Your principle is short one state. >> The difference between zero >> and one and one and two and two and three--and zero and two and zero >> and three and so on and so forth--is still difference! " What is this obsession literary theorists have with the word 'difference'? As I recall, after some 8 years, 'difference' is at the heart of Derrida's smash hit essay. (The actual word was French, something like 'differance', which, I was assured by a footnote, didn't translate easily into English, providing the reader a convenient explanation as to why the essay doesn't seem to make any sense.) Help me out. Are you and the gange saying that the purpose of language is to convey differences? That a system incapable of distinguishing different states is incapable of language? That a concept derives meaning only by the fact that it differs from another? Am I close? -Sean ------_=_NextPart_001_01BF1FE0.76A6BD3C Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
Matt:
>> Suppose we did use a ternary system. =
Why wouldn't the defining
>> principle still be presence vs. =
absence?"
No, it wouldn't because there are 3 fundamental = states in a tertiary system, not 2. Your principle is short one = state.
>> The difference between zero
>> and one and one and two and two and =
three--and zero and two and zero
>> and three and so on and so forth--is still =
difference! "
What is this obsession literary theorists have with = the word 'difference'? As I recall, after some 8 years, 'difference' is = at the heart of Derrida's smash hit essay. (The actual word was French, = something like 'differance', which, I was assured by a footnote, didn't = translate easily into English, providing the reader a convenient = explanation as to why the essay doesn't seem to make any sense.) =
Help me out. Are you and the gange saying that the = purpose of language is to convey differences? That a system incapable = of distinguishing different states is incapable of language? That a = concept derives meaning only by the fact that it differs from another? = Am I close?
-Sean
------_=_NextPart_001_01BF1FE0.76A6BD3C--