From: Mark Steven Heyman (markheyman@infoproconsulting.com)
Date: Tue Oct 26 2004 - 15:04:27 BST
Hi Erin,
On 25 Oct 2004 at 21:26, Erin wrote:
grrrrAll I have been trying to do is understand your positionsoI
tried to "pretend" the! stand of a MOQ skeptic so maybe you would
give more explicit answers but alas that strategy didn't work.I
never said**I** thought the MOQ was "non-rational" or "rational" I
am justtrying to understand your claimof the"RATIONAL empiricism"
label.
msh says:
I understand your frustration, and your use of the "pretend skeptic."
As "rational empiricism" is a well-understood philosophical
concept, I would expect the skeptic to tell me why he or she thinks
the MOQ is not rational or not empirical in nature, and this would
certainly involve attacking a particular point or two. Then we could
have a discussion.
Otherwise, I'd have to present the Metaphysics of Quality point by
point, sort of a Cliff Notes version of the whole shebang, till I
came to an idea the skeptic finds objectionable. Know what I mean?
erin said:
I have experienced value ina painting but I have never thought of
that experience as being "empirical" because that termis usually
grantedfor observable experiences.
msh says:
As long as you are able to experience value, it's safe to say that
value is empirical.
Best,
Mark Steven Heyman (msh)
--
InfoPro Consulting - The Professional Information Processors
Custom Software Solutions for Windows, PDAs, and the Web Since 1983
Web Site: http://www.infoproconsulting.com
"Thought is only a flash between two long nights, but this flash is
everything." -- Henri Poincare'
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Oct 26 2004 - 15:13:23 BST