From: Steve Peterson (peterson.steve@verizon.net)
Date: Tue Apr 20 2004 - 16:39:49 BST
Hi Sam
>I think 'eudaimonia' describes those patterns better than
intellectual. I completely accept the
> point that the levels describe patterns, not people - it is a
> presupposition of my argument.
>
Great! I wish Platt agreed.
> I think a person is a combination of all the levels plus DQ.
me too.
> What I think the stable pattern of
> fourth level quality refers to is 'character' - and people can have
> more or less character, better
> or worse characters. It is a feature of a person; it's not the whole
> person. One reason why
> 'individual' doesn't work quite so well as eudaimonic IMO, although
> it's better than intellect.
>
Do you see participating in high quality patterns of reasoning as only
part of having good character? What other patterns are missing that
make intellectual an inadequate label?
Give you give other examples of patterns that you would say a person
with good character participates in?
Can you explain how you distinguish these patterns of quality character
from social patterns?
Thanks,
Steve
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 20 2004 - 19:53:36 BST