[FRIAM] Direct conversation

[Steve Smith]

Russ Abbott wrote:
> Now that we've arrived safely in Canberra, here's my loose end.
Haloo down under!
>
>
> The more abstract way of saying this is that meaning occurs only in a 
> first person context. Without meaning, all we have are bits, photons, 
> ink on paper, etc. If you want to talk about meaning at all -- whether 
> it's the meaning of a first or third person perspective -- one has 
> already assumed that there is a first person that is understanding 
> that meaning. 
This "complementary" way of describing seems to help (me at least) in 
resolving some distinctions between my own experience and the general 
shared intellectualization about these things.   I have a *distinct* 
feeling of "being me" that I cannot shake by noticing that noticing my 
self (my body, my shifting ocular POV with my shifting motor activities) 
is very similar to noticing not-self (3rd person).   The complement, 
...  noticing that noticing others (3rd person observation) is 
intrinsically the same as noticing myself goes down a lot easier and is 
roughly what I call "empathy".   The former causes me to get caught up 
in the differences while the latter allows me to notice the similarities.

Meaning seems hard to pin down without a receiver of meaning... perhaps 
this is part of what lead folks to want a God to be the infinite 
observer that not only gave all things their existence but also by 
elaboration, their meaning.