>>Although truth may be teleological (like a thread) and tautological (like a
>>needle) it is necessarily "teleotautological"; that is, the thread must go
>>through the needle at the eye of the needle or else one cannot sew.
>That sounds intriguing, but I doubt I'm the only one that doesn't understand
>how a thread is teleological and a needle is tautological.
>David McFadzean
David,
It is a complicated metaphor. A thread is not a teleology: A needle is not
a tautology...needle and thread therefore represent tautology and teleology
like eye of the needle represents teleotautology.
What is the relationship to between needle and thread: What is the
relationship between teleology and tautology...How can these relationships
bring one to the conclusion that a teleotautology is like the eye of a needle?
The relationship between needle and thread is that as a needle goes
up-and-down (through a fabric) the thread moves "forward" across the fabric
(well, or the fabric moves continuously in opposition to the potential
linearity of the thread and the potential repetitiveness of the needle... so
that, at least, there is a relationship between the movement of the needle,
the movement of the thread and the movement of the fabric such that chaotic
movement (or no movement), linear movement, and repetative movement combine
to form a stitch over time--a continuation of "something" around or about
"something" through "something" and in relation to "something"...this
"something" is the "idea".
Quickly then, a tautology (like a needle) is a repetative idea; a teleology
(like a thread) is a linear idea; and the continuation of this idea around,
about, through, and in relation to "something" (even if it is relation to
itself--which would make it a "knot") seems to represent the major
directions which an idea might develop: Still--I am saying--that the
"non-point" where thread and needle meet, the eye, draws all possibilities
to what has been termed "amorphous reality", "a moving simultaneous center",
"4th dimensional space/time" (others?). And *that* complicates the idea of
a needle and thread as much as is practical for this discussion.
Keeping all of the variables to three constants we have needle, thread and
eye. Which is not to imply that any two realities (objective/subjective,
tautological/teleological, etc) exhaust the possibilities for describing a
simple relationship--the relationship implied by needle and thread, that
being the "eye". But using the terms teleological and tautological as they
are usually used, it DOES imply that a repetitive idea + a linear idea can
have a constant (though infinite) point of interaction...and that at this
process something meaningful occurrs which does not occur minus this
process...."persistence"?
Further, if the eye of the needle is used to refer to "consciousness" (which
is assumed has some relationship to reality...the fabric), then
consciousness makes existence (the needle) and being (the thread) do
something meaningful--that is "sew" (a pattern, or a hem, or two parts into
one). It is a good metaphor but one must be able to see the non-sequiter
relationship between needle, thread, fabric, stitch and hole...that is one
must be ablle to "sew" (or "so", this is true SO this is true SO this is
true...).
ps...I am looking for (and will probably send) another piece I wrote on the
sewing metaphor and how certain words (sew, thread, point--as in "So, what
is the point to this thread") imply that ancient peoples used the example of
sewing to teach communication.
Brett
Returning,
rBERTS%n
Rabble Sonnet Retort
In war there is no substitute for victory.
Douglas MacArthur