[Tango-L] Studying Latin - Faulty Logic

[Lucia]

Jeff:
  
  Comments included in the  text:

Jeff Gaynor <jgaynor at jqhome.net> escribió:  Lucia wrote:

>The  point from the Vatican story, as understood by Jeff, is that complex  problems could be resolved by applying a few rules.
>

Wrong. The point of the story is that people attempt to formulate 
systems that are too complex. 
    
  >> Lucia: Wrong. People create first complex models which then  try to reduce by applying formulae. Think Aristotle as the first  observer of nature, followed by Linnaeus followed by modern  science.<<
    
  In the case of Latin there are formidable 
theories about how it functions that simply preclude ever using it in 
anything approaching real time. Languages must be speakable or they 
aren't languages and Brother Reginald's quip about winos really does hit 
the nail on the head. 
    
  >> Lucia:  Spoken, vulgar Latin was a collection of  dialects  of the written classical one, and it has been lost. No  one knows  how  either one was spoken, how it sounded. But I  bet the Roman dancers of yore cursed each other in vulgar - things  didn't change, did they??<<
    
  If people do something (dance, talk, play music, 
etc.) on a routine basis then every part of the analysis should come 
from the perspective of making it fit within a real-time framework. Much 
analysis fails on this account and the results are simply theoretical 
artifices.
    
  >> Lucia: We have probably a different understanding of the term  !real-time!. How do you envision Einstein's work in the world of  1905?<<

> This is true, arguably, most of the times,  but ignores the enormous underlying research and analysis that went  into defining each rule. Nohing new here, think exact sciences... 
>
Another way of looking at the problem is to listen to a bunch of dog 
owners. They'll argue forever about breeds and their merits but the 
basic point is that a dachshund is every bit as much of a dog as a 
mastiff.  The dogs don't care one way or another and the problem is the 
people's attempt at analysis --  you probably can't come up with a 
rigorous definition of a dog in the first place so you are always doomed 
to argue over the details. Seems to me this is part of the problem with 
these arguments on the list, right? My post, I hoped, was to make a plea 
that everyone is trying to understand it the way that works best for them.
    
  >>Lucia:  As a dog owner all my life, I can assure you   that there are enormous differences between the breeds. My current King  Charles watches me through mirrors, and only pees in groves in the  pavement :-)<<
  

> If Jeff tries, unconvincingly, to apply the rule concept  to tango, he cannot follow up on the concept, simply because Tango has  a social life that cannot be summed up in a few rules. 
>  
>
Taken in conjunction with my above statements, much of the discussion on 
the list is arguing about the systems involved. A better approach I 
suspect (this is possibly my naive beginner mind at work) to think of 
tango as being a style of movement and there being a range of acceptable 
motions to achieve it. This would be something your average stevedore 
could do on a Friday night while slightly drunk. :-)  Believe me he's 
not thinking about his stylistic purity or some intricate system of 
footwork. He's navigating, keeping a connection and playing footsie with 
his partner.
    
  >> Lucia: The sense of music and rhythm is innate in the human  species. Almost everyone sways, or walks !left-right-left! or dances.  Higher forms of dance originate in the human sense of achievement and  competition, spiritual or sexual. As an aside, Tango IS sexual, What is  this non-sense about distant-embrace??<<

>  
> We  are witnessing, in the current discussion threads on Tango, attempts by  proponents of different styles, to hammer-out their only Rules, put  them on their own Pedestal, pray to them and proclaim them them as the  only God. Hence the religious wars. Human, all too Human...
>  
>  The probable cause for this mentality is our monotheitic society...  Wouldn't it be better to create a tango mythology with many small Gods,  and Nymphs, living in harmony?
>
Hmmmm... one of the cornerstones of Hindu belief is that of polytheism. 
As it was explained to me, the central idea is that people do not 
worship God but are only able to worship what they can conceive to be 
God. If you really think a rock is a deity then that is where you are in 
your thinking, at least for now. Therefore, one should be allowed to do 
as one pleases tempered with the sympathy that everyone is doing the 
best they can with what they have. We should strive for that, shouldn't 
we? We don't need more small Gods. Heck, I think we have enough on the 
list already! We need people who are fallible and realize they are in 
the same boat trying to explore.

  >>Lucia:  I disagree - it is fun to have a nymph of the  stream at U.Pittsburgh and another one at Rio de la Plata. One only  needs a sense of humor.<<
>  
>  
>
Jeff
    
  >> Lucia :-)



http://www.campaignforrealbeauty.com/flat3.asp?id=2287
__________________________________________________
Correo Yahoo!
Espacio para todos tus mensajes, antivirus y antispam ¡gratis! 
¡Abrí tu cuenta ya! - http://correo.yahoo.com.ar