From: Scott Roberts (jse885@localnet.com)
Date: Tue Nov 22 2005 - 19:20:42 GMT
Bo,
Bo said (to Mike):
Scott's fallacy is that he refuses MOQ's meta-view that sees a
4th. level emerging from the 3rd. but sees all from (in moqish)
the 4th. and from there assumes its subjective stance, everything
is intellect (in the mind sense) according to him, and - phew - no
wonder there are different S/Os. There is the basic mind that
sees the mind/matter context, then the mind that sees the mind
that sees the mind/matter context, the .... etc. ad absurdum.
No, Scott brings nothing to our understanding, I finally dragged
his variety of the MOQ out of him and it appeared as SOM in the
"Us/Not Us" form.
Scott:
What I say is fallacy only if one assumes that the MOQ's treatment of
intellect is correct. I do not assume it. Nor do I assume SOM's treatment of
intellect, but here you are saying that I do. If you see my view as being
one of "SOM in the Us/Not Us" then you haven't understood anything I've
said. It looks to me like you took my attempt at explicating the SOM view of
'inside' and 'outside' as being my view. It wasn't. My view is that
everything is intellect, but NOT in the SOM (mind)sense, and NOT in the MOQ
(4th level static) sense.
- Scott
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 : Wed Nov 23 2005 - 01:15:27 GMT