From: Paul Turner (paul@turnerbc.co.uk)
Date: Mon Jan 03 2005 - 22:38:22 GMT
Hi Ian, MSH
Ian said:
Paul, careful with his words,
He does not say
"There are no things-in-themselves."
"The primary 'reality-in-itself' is nothingness."
He says (in the quotes you provide)
Primary Reality (things in themselves, out there) are not independent of
value or relationships, in fact they are relationships.
He doesn't say they don't exist.
He is saying they don't exist in an independent SOMist way.
Paul:
If every thing always turns out be a relationship with something else
i.e., exists only within a relationship with something else, then things
themselves i.e., with no relationship to anything else, don't exist.
Also, with the language he was using, MSH seemed to be talking about a
Kantian ding an sich which the MOQ definitely does deny exists.
"Quality in the MOQ is monistic and thus is not the same as Kant's
"thing in itself" which is the object of a dualism." [Lila's Child
p.348]
Are there non-SOMist things-in-themselves? What could they possibly be?
As for primary reality, this is proposed as Quality and Quality is
equated with nothingness. Therefore, the primary reality is nothingness
and not "things in themselves, out there," as you state above.
Regards
Paul
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 Jan 04 2005 - 01:15:40 GMT