Brings to mind the marriage vow “to have and to hold"

> On Aug 24, 2021, at 9:52 PM, Frank Wimberly <wimber...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Spanish has two words, "haber" and "tener" that are usually translated into 
> English as "to have".  The former is the auxiliary verb and the latter 
> denotes possession.  
> 
> ---
> Frank C. Wimberly
> 140 Calle Ojo Feliz, 
> Santa Fe, NM 87505
> 
> 505 670-9918
> Santa Fe, NM
> 
> On Tue, Aug 24, 2021, 5:48 AM David Eric Smith <desm...@santafe.edu 
> <mailto:desm...@santafe.edu>> wrote:
> It’s the right kind of answer, Nick, and I don’t find it compelling.
> 
> Put aside for a moment the use of “have” as an auxiliary verb.  I can come up 
> with wonderful reasons why that is both informative and primordial, but I 
> also believe they are complete nonsense and only illustrate that there are no 
> good rules for reliable argument in this domain.
> 
> Also, I don’t adopt the frame of using the past tense as a device to skew the 
> argument toward the conclusion you started with.  (Now _there_ is a category 
> error: to start with a conclusion.  Lawyer!)  
> 
> I think probably throughout Indo-European derived languages, “have” is used 
> to refer to inherent attributes.  I have brown eyes.  I have eyes at all.  It 
> takes a surprisingly convoluted construction to assert that someone looking 
> at my face will find two brown eyes there, that doesn’t use “have” as the 
> verb of attribution.  So that’s old, and it is something the language has 
> really committed to.  I think you have to commit unnatural acts to argue that 
> that is a verb of action.
> 
> Possession isn’t even a lot more action-y.  I have two turntables and a 
> microphone.  If nobody is trying to take them from me, it is not clear that I 
> am “doing” anything to “have” them.
> 
> (btw, I am not a metaphor monist.  I practice polysemy, like the Mormons.  So 
> it seems completely natural that there can be multiple meanings, if there are 
> any meanings at all, and that distinct ones can use the same word because 
> they are somehow similar despite not being the self-same.) 
> 
> It seems to me as if the truest action usage of “have” is one that is not 
> nearly as baked into the language.  If I have lunch, I eat lunch.  If I have 
> a fit, I throw a tantrum.  Many circumlocutions available to me.  That also 
> could be quite idiosyncratic to small language branches.  I think you would 
> never, in normal speech, say you “had” lunch in German.  You would just say 
> you ate lunch.  (Or in Italian or French either, for that matter.)  These 
> kinds of usages do not seem to me to carry strong cognitive weight.
> 
> So it seems to me that the semantic core of “have” is probably attribution.  
> The legal sense of ownership is probably metaphorical.  It would not _at all_ 
> surprise me if the use both in the auxiliary (widespread in IE) and in the 
> deictic (French il y a, there is) are deep metaphors describing either the 
> ambient, or the ineluctable structure of time, with attributes.
> 
> But, back to whether attribution is natural for emotions (or, as good as 
> anything else, and better than most):
> 
> If I “have” a sunny disposition, that seems not far from having brown eyes.  
> Italian: Il ha un buon aspetto. 
> 
> If I am having a bad day, that is a little different from having brown eyes, 
> and perhaps closer to having a black eye.  Not an essence that defines my 
> nature, but a condition I can be in, or “take on". To say, indeed, that I 
> parse that as a pattern I carry around (as an aspect of constitution or 
> condition) does not seem category-erroneous to me.
> 
> Sure, there are patterns in my behavior: if I take a hot shower and the water 
> lands on my black eye, I will wince.  If you say good morning and I am having 
> a bad day, I will growl at you.  A Skinnerian can say that my wincing is all 
> there is to my black eye.  But a physician would tell me to put ice on it, 
> and would use the color of the bruise to indicate which eye I should put the 
> ice on.
> 
> These uses of having seem tied up, more closely than with anything else, with 
> uses of being, as SteveS mentioned.  So the be/do dichotomy seems to 
> determine largely where the verb usages split.
> 
> Of course, living is a process, played out on organized structures.  Brains 
> probably look different in eeg and electrode arrays in one emotional 
> condition than in another, and they probably also have different 
> neurotransmitter profiles, and maybe other things.  Even You probably don’t 
> want to refer to a neurotransmitter concentration as a “doing”; It is a 
> variable of state, like a black eye is a state of an eye.  You might want to 
> refer to the brain action pattern as “doing”, but maybe only in the sense 
> that you refer to the existence of non-dead metabolism as “doing” — they are 
> both processes.  To me, the common language seems to split the be and the do 
> on brevity, transience, isolation, or suddenness of an activity.  I _am_ 
> surly, and I _do_ growl at you.  
> 
> If non-black English still preserved the habitual tense, as John McWhorter 
> claims black American English still does, we might be able to make a 
> different kind of a distinction, between the pattern or habit as a state, and 
> the event within it as an act.  That might give an even better account of the 
> split in the common language.
> 
> I also want to acknowledge Glen’s points about working through many frames in 
> a dynamical way.  I can’t add anything, but I do agree.
> 
> Eric
> 
> 
>> On Aug 24, 2021, at 12:30 PM, <thompnicks...@gmail.com 
>> <mailto:thompnicks...@gmail.com>> <thompnicks...@gmail.com 
>> <mailto:thompnicks...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> 
>> Now wait a minute!  This is the sort of question I am supposed to ask of 
>> you?  A question to which the answer is so obvious to the recipient that he 
>> is in danger of not being able to locate it.   
>>  
>> Ok, so, their meanings obviously overlap.   If you tell me you “had” a steak 
>> last night, I wont assume that it’s available  for us to eat tonight: “had” 
>> is serving as a verb of action.  The situation is further confused  by the 
>> fact that both words are used as helper words, i.e, words that indicate the 
>> tense of another verb.  To say that I “have” gone and that I “done” gone 
>> mean the same thing in different dialects 
>>  
>> In general the grammar of the two words is different.  If you say I had 
>> something, I am sent looking for a property, possession or attribute.  If 
>> you say I did something, I am sent looking for an action I performed.   So, 
>> there is a vast inclination to make emotion words as a reference to 
>> something we carry inside, rather than a pattern in what we do.  This seems 
>> to me like misdirection, a category error in Ryle’s terms.   
>>  
>> Does that help?    
>>  
>> Mumble, mumble, as steve would say. 
>>  
>> Nick 
>> Nick Thompson
>> thompnicks...@gmail.com <mailto:thompnicks...@gmail.com>
>> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/ 
>> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwordpress.clarku.edu%2fnthompson%2f&c=E,1,JZI_rTsnO4PMxifIK-1Pc4gAtSO08UfA4WqKjx73T4Ek3tY5Xl71BUdt3A807uKgEplYNDHINHuRjmL2qnv7SkO_J10fWv5jebCjhCravg,,&typo=1>
>>  
>> From: Friam <friam-boun...@redfish.com <mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com>> 
>> On Behalf Of David Eric Smith
>> Sent: Monday, August 23, 2021 4:23 PM
>> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam@redfish.com 
>> <mailto:friam@redfish.com>>
>> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Eternal questions
>>  
>> Nick, what’s the difference between having and doing?
>>  
>> I once heard Ray Jackendoff give quite a nice talk on word categories.  Of 
>> all of it, the one part I remember the most about is what he said about 
>> prepositions.  Even after you are getting right most of the rest of word 
>> usage in a new language (or handling it well with a dumb, rule-based 
>> translator), you are still at sea in the prepositions.  Their scopes are not 
>> completely arbitrary, but arbitrary in such large part that speakers 
>> essentially learn them nearly as a list of ad hoc applications.
>>  
>> But when we are in a specialist domain, such as reference to the unpacking 
>> of the convention-term “emotion”, which we all know is a different 
>> specialist domain from car ownership or the consumption of lunch, we know 
>> that verbs are not on any a priori firmer ground than prepositions.  Or it 
>> seems to me, we should expect that to be so.
>>  
>> I am struck by how widespread it is in languages to use the same particle or 
>> other construction for possession and attribution.  Both in concretes and in 
>> the abstractions that seemingly derive from them.  SteveG will like this one 
>> from Chinese if I haven’t messed it up or misunderstood it: youde you, youde 
>> meiyou.  Some have it, some don’t.
>>  
>> Performance of an act, being configured in a state or condition, if we use 
>> passphrases rather than passwords, we can discriminate many categories.
>>  
>> So when we use metaphors to expand the scope of reference and discourse (to 
>> eventually shed their metaphor status and become true polysemes once our 
>> familiarity in the new domain is such that, as novelists say, it “stands up 
>> and casts a shadow”), are some of the metaphors more obligatory than others? 
>>  Are the psychologists sure they are right about which ones?  Are they right?
>>  
>> Eric
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> 
>> 
>>> On Aug 24, 2021, at 3:06 AM, <thompnicks...@gmail.com 
>>> <mailto:thompnicks...@gmail.com>> <thompnicks...@gmail.com 
>>> <mailto:thompnicks...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>  
>>> AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAArgh!
>>>  
>>> How we seal ourselves in caves of nonsense!
>>>  
>>> And emotion is not something we “have”; it’s something we do.  Or, if you 
>>> prefer a dualist sensory metaphor, it’s a particular mode of feeling the 
>>> world.  
>>>  
>>> n
>>>  
>>> Nick Thompson
>>> thompnicks...@gmail.com <mailto:thompnicks...@gmail.com>
>>> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/ 
>>> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwordpress.clarku.edu%2fnthompson%2f&c=E,1,7HSjAiYZs0TskSYM3z8t3I3vm7JNBV7OyZgHYp-6EjYczSSRW9xIT6typjL4CJpU_atJnKNr9galrl_vRQGGlXHYIX3WqoquVu8Bpe1ntqUc&typo=1>
>>>  
>>> From: Friam <friam-boun...@redfish.com <mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com>> 
>>> On Behalf Of Pieter Steenekamp
>>> Sent: Monday, August 23, 2021 6:04 AM
>>> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam@redfish.com 
>>> <mailto:friam@redfish.com>>
>>> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Eternal questions
>>>  
>>> The creators of the Aibo robot dog say it has ‘real emotions and instinct’. 
>>> This is obviously not true, it's just an illusion.
>>> 
>>> But then, according to Daniel Dennett, human consciousness is just an 
>>> illusion.
>>> https://ase.tufts.edu/cogstud/dennett/papers/illusionism.pdf 
>>> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fase.tufts.edu%2fcogstud%2fdennett%2fpapers%2fillusionism.pdf&c=E,1,wZyzI4xcowqEH1XfK9Q39EPbwHxfV11-EVaCCROdnuFD-hDpoJBA6vqVkaGgbd-yOuYwvTupjP_Soz_obIbOZjgWkLMocfZEa2BpUqNsBKBy&typo=1>
>>>  
>>> On Mon, 23 Aug 2021 at 09:18, Jochen Fromm <j...@cas-group.net 
>>> <mailto:j...@cas-group.net>> wrote:
>>>> "In today’s AI universe, all the eternal questions (about intentionality, 
>>>> consciousness, free will, mind-body problem...) have become engineering 
>>>> problems", argues this Guardian article. 
>>>> https://www.theguardian.com/science/2021/aug/10/dogs-inner-life-what-robot-pet-taught-me-about-consciousness-artificial-intelligence
>>>>  
>>>> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.theguardian.com%2fscience%2f2021%2faug%2f10%2fdogs-inner-life-what-robot-pet-taught-me-about-consciousness-artificial-intelligence&c=E,1,0zM4mCzKmbes0weZLeJCmVy6dAfDvfYxSyHKpvl-aa8-hwd84lMymcY9HHVsp4jXbWOCjmb3kQDLfcwUGjHCouKd8sNTTfFuQtv62vY-RfAsXg,,&typo=1>
>>>>  
>>>> -J.
>>>>  
>>>> - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
>>>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>>>> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam 
>>>> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,USKWJzhBjgjJh7B-0LkOfSd3nemyd1czMDhazLKVBZtafmJNbogUKdBckMq8YDhHys57cq3edfUxouOPaNKkqPHN7BSB2_jSqY2nj0PnsWO4&typo=1>
>>>> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com 
>>>> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,kQIZirvod42goqmNxnJBxEDkNQZgDx4-Cpp9h61g27SR8pmXJ_MMfIylqQDG-apIDYJ41YBK5dlfDvP0mcsA7tgQfSN_fX8GOBstoJ7bRsPqllS8Hti8YhbPnto,&typo=1>
>>>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 
>>>> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,W-ArAxIKQNrM-7j3cHCB7DvRKs598JN3aWrygvNoMFhZMfHBdCpRnINnr__3jjhPqyWLiXzRL9KRjVJqtjeAAqtCaNq5qf7Ix3B4AjcEzvp4LWtuE0_bNYs00g,,&typo=1>
>>>> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ 
>>>> <http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/>
>>> - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
>>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>>> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam 
>>> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,-pDsdi2AM5J35lPLI_g3-LtyM-BJTNkO0LNOJk2N-zEMrFYJAuMsizuSyrQ7ah2EPXAXyuv9FarhQ-3FZOuytwgV2gtKas1n43TbWDgKajH-&typo=1>
>>> un/subscribe 
>>> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,MzWtukTHxTmO0o4T4K75ZC6zy8h-gQojlN_6BSajavsHHOIC9hTMR8rjRvM4bWXKVt05qr4hoH2_sIH0XXVCaG4M61FBfWSeFBC6EOnQSCYDf-SZ&typo=1
>>>  
>>> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,MzWtukTHxTmO0o4T4K75ZC6zy8h-gQojlN_6BSajavsHHOIC9hTMR8rjRvM4bWXKVt05qr4hoH2_sIH0XXVCaG4M61FBfWSeFBC6EOnQSCYDf-SZ&typo=1>
>>> FRIAM-COMIC 
>>> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,t5Vd_UMHRAMj63ikH0-cOAr7pxIW_XRAEXTZXCbAclW2tPEeUJHS7SstrpQmDgjUyzeW0mVLy-LmuIF58gw1_1tcSuaylib5tGj2zgHAqJE7&typo=1
>>>  
>>> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,t5Vd_UMHRAMj63ikH0-cOAr7pxIW_XRAEXTZXCbAclW2tPEeUJHS7SstrpQmDgjUyzeW0mVLy-LmuIF58gw1_1tcSuaylib5tGj2zgHAqJE7&typo=1>
>>> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ 
>>> <http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/>
>>  
>> - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam 
>> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,lDRWfd7vQ4bY6QBmtEGfkxSp0OuYrZwTN1W2Q-NrYRUrh-OdlBtwUFVsPxb9OVWOz5XJmt4pTxp-0SRaRsWdR49E0RZhZkoIxY6XXMtQ&typo=1>
>> un/subscribe 
>> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,BFllSC-pZ0weFNqjV1iB-w3DR43rvvcmxiYfCh3Inlzi3UOaC9v0gh67rb1SPyCmQIqhrg8ev1C7TSKyRr6rbt_1hS-Cky5ClbwSki3p&typo=1
>>  
>> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,BFllSC-pZ0weFNqjV1iB-w3DR43rvvcmxiYfCh3Inlzi3UOaC9v0gh67rb1SPyCmQIqhrg8ev1C7TSKyRr6rbt_1hS-Cky5ClbwSki3p&typo=1>
>> FRIAM-COMIC 
>> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,lWRd3h5zEi_Sd3v9P1_NsGjaV_yXFovGQ-t8djjh-BNY8-KmDoPieLQWC8sugjPgglUTHnntK67jLtccS-k24YihXM8lbfVJ0LhKe0F-QUg-&typo=1
>>  
>> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,lWRd3h5zEi_Sd3v9P1_NsGjaV_yXFovGQ-t8djjh-BNY8-KmDoPieLQWC8sugjPgglUTHnntK67jLtccS-k24YihXM8lbfVJ0LhKe0F-QUg-&typo=1>
>> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ 
>> <http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/>
> - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam 
> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,EFktOWQ8-6uQUzJUiwvscpVjRU8wf4DcrlvNSmFde6RxC_Mu3IY4znoO1Dgk_h1iK8a_Y6KXhvigRg2kJgVDWYrf1_Ttcbz0qHEQ_vq2cAq0RvMaXrYha-o3Pg,,&typo=1>
> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com 
> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,9cXpCP8tTLZf61kcKqDGRhouscUvG-5FcCeweZTkq1zL2ojMaRHaMW6xMUswSTPePQWdazb-V7PyE-d72AM4fcEWo1t5RoGNw8FCM-vKIuQdbHtFSU7i&typo=1>
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 
> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,RCiXJ3vB3PD7iFeRfZBir1-UnAkPbJL_NaMR7QyRrEzPyaWFnSJ0Eb67vbEYtUH5fL7KDoZMWfcRNTvuZShuX5205rRRub1doH2CIceLRl3sQpiCQw,,&typo=1>
> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ 
> <http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/>
> - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
> un/subscribe 
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,vOPdOQo3OMRj9VlVIEBBhQ4DoLXTIeSfDLaG_Yqj-D0WKMJspdSVgwrZ11n4QGFXAEdyMQsPuuQpXplhovMiJwu326mnC74XWKDSlzhHhHGWm5s,&typo=1
> FRIAM-COMIC 
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,HAoX7tmyZQx1LGXf7pikIkZjPcI0aJ8a9WD0WhKvc-PziRjG0a6rh4XdGRPQ5gdYDZp6tab14uoTZpZxE2meIXC0jrHqjay58BZj_YbfYRZEhhCWBwx9uEM,&typo=1
> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/

- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/

Reply via email to