Evidence 3, just for reference's sake

DRAFT

The idea of the signifier and the signified is the word(s) spoken or written; signifier and signified together are noema-revealing. Thus writing at its core is the process of uncovering the what of what-is clearly, transparently, fully, etc. Using language is the process of doing phenomenology in the first part, fixing the what-is.

The noesis, or how of noema-revealing, involves at least in part the form that language takes. If spoken-so-that-the-other receives, then it is speaking, and all manner of things related to speaking-as-act and spoken-as-heard. If reading, then it is writing, and all manner of things related to text production and reception.

Comments

Aside

"Lauren Silbert uses brain scans to try to zero in on what happens when two people click." (http://www.radiolab.org/2011/apr/18/soul-mates-and-brain-doubles/) Ms. Silbert read a story and had her brain activity mapped (scanned). Then she told the story to others and their brain activities were mapped. One listener's brain activity matched that of the storyteller, exactly. Thesis? The matching points represent the same experiences of the words-images that comprise the story. And if they match entirely, both storyteller and listener have had the same experience that the words create (evoke?). Is this the fundamental phenomenology of writing--the intentionality--to create in your experience that which I intend and had when I wrote what I did?

All is interpretation

What appears to you is what is. There is nothing outside of you which tells you, or me, that IT, what ever "it" is, IS. The only way I can know is through me and my senses. My stream of experiences are mine, no one else's. These experiences do not prove the existence of the exterior world or anything in it. I construct that sense-world by attributing my sensations to an unknown universe. The world then is my projected picture of it, symbolic and approximate. We justify, on the whole, the external world by accepting our private evidence that something exists beyond ourselves. So, I contend, we go about our business thinking that I see, feel, hear--sense--what you think you see, etc., or can. Thus the bases for science and other things. I becomes w e. And we proceed beyond me and under the illusion that my concrete reality is the same as yours, a "consensual realty." We carry on our oh-so-practical lives on what are defenseless and uncertain foundations. Thus all...

Writing is composing

Research question (working) What is it like to write (the action)? What is it like to make or create by putting together letters, words, phrases, sentences, paragraphs . . . whole texts ready to be read? Background "Writing is the representation of language in a textual medium through the use of a set of signs or symbols (known as a writing system). It is distinguished from illustration, such as cave drawing and painting, and non-symbolic preservation of language via non-textual media, such as magnetic tape audio." "Description is one of four rhetorical modes (also known as modes of discourse), along with exposition, argumentation, and narration. Each of the rhetorical modes is present in a variety of forms and each has its own purpose and conventions." "Description is also the fiction-writing mode for transmitting a mental image of the particulars of a story." "The purpose of description is to re-create or visually present a person, place, e...

Noematics 101, an inquiry into writing as phenomenology

Search This Blog