<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple style='word-wrap:break-word'><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal><b>From:</b> spike@rainier66.com <spike@rainier66.com> <br><br><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>>>…Seriously though, language shapes how/what we think (and CAN think) and what we think is conveyed by language. I know the vanguards of old ways refuse to accept language evolution. I understand. However, we need to continue evolution in language to keep up with evolution in thought … Mike<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>…<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>>…We need NewSpeak. …spike<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Everything Brent has been thinking about for at least a coupla decades makes perfect sense in this context: he already knew we don’t have existing words for some concepts, so he invented them. This is Brentish NewSpeak. Well OK, fair game. How the heck else can you describe a difficult new concept other than coining terms for it?<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>If you have never read Orwell’s classic, do read the sections on NewSpeak, and see how such a concept can go wrong. Then figure out how such a concept can go right. If you are in that category, please why the heck haven’t you read Orwell’s classic? Unacceptable! Go the heck to the library, note the date which it was written, check it out and read it! That man was the prophet among us. He saw it all.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>spike<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div></div></div></body></html>