From: Valuemetaphysics@aol.com
Date: Sat Sep 27 2003 - 05:44:00 BST
Hi Mark
I find your reasoning here contradictory so I'm unsure how seriously to take
your words. You say you find value in Bo's work yet you also state he makes
outrageous claims, generally considered, that is. I happen to have read just
about every one of Bodvar's posts over the years and I don't consider any of
his claims to be outrageous or damaging. If I might be so bold to inquire,
who is it that is doing the general considering? Is there a MOQ general
considering committee that I am unaware of?
Dan
Hello Dan,
The MoQ says that experience is primarily of value. Therefore, anything that
anyone says has value. The statement, 'Bo's works have value' is consistent
with the statement, 'I find value in Bo's works.' The statement, 'Dog shit has
value' is also consistent with experience being primarily of value.
The question then becomes, 'In what sense are Bo's works valuable?' The MoQ
provides an intelligent way of discussing values that is more subtle than the
general description of finding value in something someone has said.
While Bo's works have value, by the very nature of experience of them, the
MoQ suggests that we may discriminate between social and intellectual values.
Bo's works therefore have intellectual and social value.
(You have read just about every one of Bo's posts over the years, which i
shall assume, if i may, to mean that there are some posts you have not read. What
proportion this is exactly, i cannot indicate - 10% 20% 75%? - I have no
idea, and in no way wish to estimate. However, that a proportion has not been read
is evident from your statement. This may be significant if the proportion of
Bo's posts you have yet to experience, i.e. value, are the ones i am referring
to?)
The intellectual value of Bo's works is important. Intellectual values are
paramount in a forum such as the MoQ.org.
The social value of Bo's work may be a problem? Having just about read every
one of Bo's posts over the years, you may disagree? But i find Bo's statements
that he is the proper author of the MoQ (a statement you do not find
outrageous or in any sense damaging) to be outrageous. The damage instigated by this
expression derives from an increased weakening of the intellectual perception
of the MoQ: regardless of intellectual value, it is appropriate to declare
social approval of one's own ideas.
Mark
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 : Sat Sep 27 2003 - 05:44:59 BST