On Sun, August 8, 2010 21:41, Kim Mosley wrote: > See this webpage about Steiglitz's Equivalent series: > http://tinyurl.com/233awpf > > I can hardly imagine a photograph that doesn't suggest a thought. Some are > more overt, like Wynn Bullock who claimed he made photographs that > illustrated the time-space continuum. Sure, but looking at a view out a window suggests thoughts, too; I think that's a statement about the human mind, rather than about photographs. > John Dewey on "What is Thought": > http://www.brocku.ca/MeadProject/Dewey/Dewey_1910a/Dewey_1910_a.html One > definition he speaks of is anything that goes through our mind. And, incidentally, what is "mind"? And is it only the part we're conscious of? > David is certainly right that there are many definitions of thought... but > there are scientific definitions as well as philosophical definitions. > See: > http://www.blackstarreview.com/rev-0150.html Certainly scientists are attempting to define it; that's what scientists do when faced with a problem like this. My point is that we haven't gotten very far yet -- definitions aren't widely accepted. Which that review nicely supports. -- David Dyer-Bennet, dd-b@xxxxxxxx; http://dd-b.net/ Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/ Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/ Dragaera: http://dragaera.info
