Re: [-empyre-] the symbolic and the real

["eugenie (temp)" <eugenies@onetel.net.uk>]

again, i'm gonna have to argue a bit.... 'us convincing ourselves' kind of
ghettoizes the entire argument in the domain of the semiotic or culturally
meaningful... what is so engaging about affect is the fact that it is
resonant without being culturally quantifiable or legible as such - it
occupes the domain of the sub or supra-rational.

e



on 8/10/03 6:16 AM, saul ostrow at so5@nyu.edu wrote:

> 
> 
> Alan Sondheim wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Again I'd like to argue that there is no difference between vr and pr
>> except for ontology -
> 
> 
> to me the difference would be one of conventions and of epistemology --
> we have to convince ourselves that the VR is actual rather than merely
> code and on the other hand with pr we often commit ourselves to
> doubting the codes that we use to order it  -m the ontological would
> reduce this to  its sources which would be a merely linguistic rather
> than a phenomenal difference
> _______________________________________________
> empyre forum
> empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> http://www.subtle.net/empyre