> Eva wrote:
>
> > I don't think most
> >of the audience was affiliated with or dependent on any particular 'big
> >institution'.
>
> Is it your impression, Eva, that most people in that audience owned their own
> businesses and did not rely on any form of Federal currency?:)
Uh, no, that wasn't my impression. But I don't see how the audience's
being citizens in a capitalist nation shows that Lakoff's object was to
make them dependent on some higher authority for their opinions.
> For the most part it seemed like Lakoff gave a lot of good information. When he
> claimed that "all existing philosophies are wrong" about the relationship
> between concepts and percepts, I found it strange that he did not know about
> objectivism. But maybe he didn't or thought it wasn't relevant.
Well, there were a lot of schools of philosophy, even Western philosophy,
that he didn't name. I understood him to be naming specific philosophies
in the classical tradition that were easily seen to contradict the
evidence he'd been presenting, and that were fairly dominant in the
memescape. He didn't say "all existing philosophies are wrong". He
did say that the classical tradition in the West, and some of the modern
reaction to it, is wrongheaded because it presumes that rational thought
is something entirely separate from embodiment. I don't know what Lakoff
has to say about objectivism; if I see him again perhaps I'll ask him.
Eva