A fishing post - Catch Magazine
 

On Jan 4, 7:28*pm, Giles wrote:
SNIP
If you've got a lot more luck than brains, you may someday discover
that buying experience is in no way fundamentally different than
buying things.
SNIP




OK

If LUCKBRAINS --- EXPERIENCE NotDiffThan THINGS
Therefore
If LUCKBRAINS --- EXPERIENCE DiffThan THINGS
&
If BRAINSLUCK --- EXPERIENCE DiffThan THINGS

So f------ what?

How about the EXPERIENCE of THINGS? or the Experience of THINGness?

Look, I knew Mr Thingnessless
Mr Thingnessless was a friend of mine
And you ain't no Mr Thingnessless

And IMHO nor are but the tinyest portion of our life-form, either out
of necessity or by choice. We are literally Thinglings. Maybe how we
get things, or even make things ourselves is the more interesting
question.

I think maybe some of the THINGness is hardwired in humans by now, and
represents the movement of physical solutions, (like extensive
hairiness), transformed into a biochemical circuit which in some way
enables a material solution, (like pelt or textile), . . . to address
the need for the body to conserve heat for example. etc etc.

Dave

A fishing post - Catch Magazine
 

On Jan 11, 3:45*am, DaveS wrote:
On Jan 4, 7:28*pm, Giles wrote:
SNIP If you've got a lot more luck than brains, you may someday discover
that buying experience is in no way fundamentally different than
buying things.

SNIP

OK

If LUCKBRAINS --- EXPERIENCE NotDiffThan THINGS
Therefore
If LUCKBRAINS --- EXPERIENCE * * *DiffThan *THINGS
&
If BRAINSLUCK --- EXPERIENCE * * *DiffThan * THINGS

So f------ what?

How about the EXPERIENCE of THINGS? or the Experience of THINGness?

Look, I knew Mr Thingnessless
Mr Thingnessless was a friend of mine
And you ain't no Mr Thingnessless

And IMHO nor are but the tinyest portion of our life-form, either out
of necessity or by choice. We are literally Thinglings. Maybe how we
get things, or even make things ourselves is the more interesting
question.

I think maybe some of the THINGness is hardwired in humans by now, and
represents the movement of physical solutions, (like extensive
hairiness), transformed into a biochemical circuit which in some way
enables a material solution, (like pelt or textile), . . . to address
the need for the body to conserve heat for example. etc etc.

Dave

A fascinating hypothesis, but where are you gonna find volunteers to
test it?

g.
who doesn't know a lot of folks keen on the notion of having their
wiring messed with.

A fishing post - Catch Magazine
 

On Jan 11, 3:30*am, Giles wrote:
On Jan 11, 3:45*am, DaveS wrote:





On Jan 4, 7:28*pm, Giles wrote:
SNIP If you've got a lot more luck than brains, you may someday discover
that buying experience is in no way fundamentally different than
buying things.

SNIP

OK

If LUCKBRAINS --- EXPERIENCE NotDiffThan THINGS
Therefore
If LUCKBRAINS --- EXPERIENCE * * *DiffThan *THINGS
&
If BRAINSLUCK --- EXPERIENCE * * *DiffThan * THINGS

So f------ what?

How about the EXPERIENCE of THINGS? or the Experience of THINGness?

Look, I knew Mr Thingnessless
Mr Thingnessless was a friend of mine
And you ain't no Mr Thingnessless

And IMHO nor are but the tinyest portion of our life-form, either out
of necessity or by choice. We are literally Thinglings. Maybe how we
get things, or even make things ourselves is the more interesting
question.

I think maybe some of the THINGness is hardwired in humans by now, and
represents the movement of physical solutions, (like extensive
hairiness), transformed into a biochemical circuit which in some way
enables a material solution, (like pelt or textile), . . . to address
the need for the body to conserve heat for example. etc etc.

Dave

A fascinating hypothesis, but where are you gonna find volunteers to
test it?

g.
who doesn't know a lot of folks keen on the notion of having their
wiring messed with.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Details, mere details. ;+)

Dave

A fishing post - Catch Magazine
 

On Jan 11, 1:27*pm, DaveS wrote:
On Jan 11, 3:30*am, Giles wrote:





On Jan 11, 3:45*am, DaveS wrote:

On Jan 4, 7:28*pm, Giles wrote:
SNIP If you've got a lot more luck than brains, you may someday discover
that buying experience is in no way fundamentally different than
buying things.

SNIP

OK

If LUCKBRAINS --- EXPERIENCE NotDiffThan THINGS
Therefore
If LUCKBRAINS --- EXPERIENCE * * *DiffThan *THINGS
&
If BRAINSLUCK --- EXPERIENCE * * *DiffThan * THINGS

So f------ what?

How about the EXPERIENCE of THINGS? or the Experience of THINGness?

Look, I knew Mr Thingnessless
Mr Thingnessless was a friend of mine
And you ain't no Mr Thingnessless

And IMHO nor are but the tinyest portion of our life-form, either out
of necessity or by choice. We are literally Thinglings. Maybe how we
get things, or even make things ourselves is the more interesting
question.

I think maybe some of the THINGness is hardwired in humans by now, and
represents the movement of physical solutions, (like extensive
hairiness), transformed into a biochemical circuit which in some way
enables a material solution, (like pelt or textile), . . . to address
the need for the body to conserve heat for example. etc etc.

Dave

A fascinating hypothesis, but where are you gonna find volunteers to
test it?

g.
who doesn't know a lot of folks keen on the notion of having their
wiring messed with.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Details, mere details. ;+)

Dave

There's an old familiar expression that crops up even here sometimes;
"The devil is in the details." Personally, I prefer Mies Van Der
Rohe's take; "God dwells in the details."

Bu then, given that there's no end to details, I suppose there's room
for both.

giles