[OPE-L:6492] RE: [OPE] What is prior?

=?iso-8859-1?Q?Abelardo_Mari=F1a_Flores?= (abmf@hp9000a1.uam.mx)
Wed, 22 Apr 1998 22:22:50 -0600

Interesting issue Alan raises. IMO, if the thing is created *before* it is distributed, its clear that the distribution process cannot increase it because such an alteration would mean a creation *by* distribution, which contradicts the first statement (creation before distribution). But, I would ask : can the distribution process diminish the magnitude of the thing ; that is can distribution destroy it (partially) ?


De: Alan Freeman[SMTP:a.freeman@greenwich.ac.uk]
Enviado el: Martes 21 de Abril de 1998 9:01 PM
Para: ope-l@galaxy.csuchico.edu
Asunto: Re: [OPE] What is prior?

I enthusiastically agree that something must be created before it is
distributed, also with or without temporal gaps. So I can add an
exclamation mark of my own.

However, an obvious further question follows: can the thing, once created,
be altered as a consequence of being distributed?

With or without temporal gaps.


Fred B. Moseley wrote:
> I am not sure this got posted on Friday, but I would just like to repeat
> my exclamation point of Chris below.
> > Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1998 13:47:09 +0100
> > From: "C. J. Arthur" <cjarthur@pavilion.co.uk>
> > Reply-To: ope-l@galaxy.csuchico.edu
> > To: ope-l@galaxy.csuchico.edu
> > Subject: Re: [OPE] What is prior?
> >
> > Response to Jerry and Alan
> >
> > >Alan replies
> > >But I get the impression that whenever Fred uses the word 'prior', he does
> > >so strictly in the sense of 'epistemologically prior'. I find this still
> > >ambiguous which is why I don't like using the word if I can avoid it, since
> > >I can never be sure how statements using this word will be read. 'Prior'
> > >could refer to the order of derivation of categories; to the order of
> > >mathematical calculation; or to a syllogistic precedence ordering in terms
> > >of generality. I don't think these are in every case the same thing.
> > >Perhaps Fred would like to comment.
> > >
> > >Alan
> > Yes indeed and one could add ontological priority when marx keeps
> > insisting something must be created before it can be distributed even if
> > there is no temporal gap. This seems to be the main thing motivating his
> > treatment of transformation and the main thing Fred starts from.
> >
> > Comradely
> > Chris
> >
> Yes, indeed !!
> Comradely,
> Fred