From: Matt the Enraged Endorphin (mpkundert@students.wisc.edu)
Date: Tue Apr 15 2003 - 18:03:21 BST
Steve,
Steve said:
You don't want to live with the contradiction of "absolutely no absolutes."
Matt is okay with that contradiction. He will continue denying that he ever
made such a claim or that such a claim is implicit in his philosophy .
Matt's philosophy disallows a primary context, a context of not having a
context, i.e. DQ, or the possibility of becoming free of all static
patterns. He's not willing to live with such a contradiction as a point of
view of not having a point of view. You seem to be okay with this
contradiction.
Matt:
I like this metaphilosophical description. You punch up the fact that, in
describing both my and Platt's position, you are using language that
neither one of us would use, i.e., language where a contradiction
appears. You use Platt's language when describing my position and
something like my language when describing Platt's. I think it's a good
summation of our metaphilosophical differences.
Matt
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 Apr 15 2003 - 18:05:24 BST