From: Eva-Lise Carlstrom (evalise@yahoo.com)
Date: Sat Mar 27 2004 - 12:57:28 MST
--- Blunderov <squooker@mweb.co.za> wrote:
> The thought strikes me that 'nothing comes from
> nothing' may offer a
> litmus-test in the problem of how to discriminate
> between abstract and
> concrete. How about the proposition that: if a thing
> can be described as
> having the ability to increase without this increase
> being at the
> expense of some other thing, then that concept is an
> abstract concept?
>
> For instance is it possible that we can imagine more
> 'love' in the world
> without it being at the expense of something else?
> Quite easily it seems
> to me. Abstract.
An abstract increases at the expense of other
abstracts. "Love", for instance, could be said to
increase at the expense of "hate", "rejection", or
"disgust". This thus does not seem like a good test
for abstractness to me, since you'd have to already
have determined whether the things it's at the cost of
are themselves abstracts.
--Eva
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time.
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html
--- To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Mar 27 2004 - 12:58:07 MST