From: Sam Norton (elizaphanian@tiscali.co.uk)
Date: Fri Mar 12 2004 - 10:17:46 GMT
Hi Wim,
A brief response on one element (the others to be returned on when I can):
You say:
> I don't agree. (-; As I wrote 11 Mar 2004 08:32:13 +0100:
> 'The interesting thing about the "Idols"-model is, that the voters don't
> need to agree on a definition of music/religion, nor on the criteria for
> good/better/best... Exchanging definitions and criteria IS useful, but only
> as a way to influence other people's votes (and as a model to present one's
> favourite religion, but everyone presenting a religion is free to
> choosehis/her own model). In the end both "music"/"religion" and the "idol"
> (the
> "best") are simply defined by the number of votes.'
I think that there are implicit criteria involved in the 'idols' format, which cannot remain
implicit in what we are proposing. For example, if someone on a pop idol programme got up and
started to give a scientific lecture centring on the dissection of a frog, the reaction would be one
of incomprehension. Rather as if someone in a football (soccer) game picked up the ball with their
hands and ran to the other end of the pitch to touch it down and score a 'try' - the reaction would
be, 'that's not the game we're playing'. The pop idol programmes, as I understand them (I've never
watched one) do depend upon an implicit understanding of 'pop', within which there's lots of scope
for disagreement (Britney vs Beyonce vs Christina vs whomsoever - although my vote would go to
Kylie) but there is an implicit consensus about what is being assessed.
In our context, the forum is geared around metaphysics (ie the MoQ), and it is a very real question
about whether metaphysics *counts* as a religion or not - or even whether 'religion' is a viable
concept etc. Now, I'd rather get on with the conversation than have yet another exhausting
digression with people about what counts as a religion or mysticism or not, but I still think we
need _some_ sort of container in which to hold the debate, and I think the SQ/DQ language is the
most appropriate.
What do you think?
Sam
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 : Fri Mar 12 2004 - 11:14:16 GMT