From: SQUONKSTAIL@aol.com
Date: Tue Mar 04 2003 - 18:56:07 GMT
A long while ago, I once said that Anthony McWatt was right to claim, in
his critique of John Beasley's essay "Understanding Quality," that there is
a difference between viewing the MoQ from a MoQ perspective and viewing it
from an SOM perspective. I would also go on to claim that there is a
difference between viewing SOM from an SOM perspective and viewing it from
a MoQ perspective. I don't think the two can be reasonably argued for, one
way or the other, because the shift is an entire shift in thinking, they
share too few premises in common for a reasonable debate to occur.
Hello there,
'I once said that...'
'I would also go on...'
'I don't think...'
Experience is common between SoM and MoQ.
'You' - as a construct, cannot 'reasonably argue' without the structure of
logic.
However, the MoQ, emphasising experience prior to conditioning, may
ostensibly be shown to have more value than SoM.
squonk
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 Mar 04 2003 - 18:56:49 GMT