Re: MD the metaphysics of freedom

From: Valuemetaphysics@aol.com
Date: Mon Jul 19 2004 - 14:06:10 BST

  • Next message: Paul Turner: "MD the metaphysics of free-enterprise"

    cont...

    > >help it
    > >Dan, that's the way i think these days.
    >

    >Dan:
    >That's ok. This too shall pass. Remember: "If he does really stick to
    >symbols that have no reference to the experienced world, the logician is
    >not
    \>going to say anything meaningful." (Robert Pirsig, Copleston annotations)
    >
    >Mark 18c-7-04: I don't understand what you mean by, "That's ok. This too
    >shall pass."

    Just what it means. All thinking is temporal.

    >
    >Dan:
    >The
    >MOQ starts with experience. The meaningful act of experience isn't divided
    >up into a bunch of sq and a bunch of sq, that all happens later. Aren't you
    >just substituting sq/sq for subject and object, by the way?
    >
    >Mark 18c-7-04: I'm getting that sinking feeling one gets when one begins to
    >realise that one is talking to oneself Dan. Coherence takes into account
    >all sq
    >patterns in the MOQ, just as the MOQ describes all sq patterns and adds DQ
    >to
    >the whole show.

    Yes so you're talking to yourself, but what has that to do with describing
    experience in meaningful terms?

    Mark 19-7-04: See for yourself.

    >
    >Dan:
    >Sure reads that
    >way to me.
    >
    >Mark 18c-7-04: Maybe you want it to read that way Dan?
    >

    Entirely possible. I thought you'd like to know how you're coming across. No
    insult meant.

    Mark 19-7-04: Non taken friend.

    >Dan:
    >You might want to look into getting that fixed before it gets
    >worse. There is no "I" hitting a "golf ball." There is just the act, the
    >experience. Afterwards I intellectually divide the act up into "me" as
    >static quality and the golf ball as static quality.
    >
    >Mark 18c-7-04: In order to communicate with you i have to use our common
    >language. This language is as it is. However, i rather hoped you would
    >understand
    >the underlying philosophy behind the language is MOQ driven.
    >Does Lila not use the same language you and i are using now Dan?
    >Hypothetical example: Mark uses the word, 'material.' Mark understands
    >material as, 'Inorganic patterns of sq.' Dan clobbers Mark for SOM speak
    >and
    >dividing experience into subjects and (material) objects.

    Actually I believe Mark might have started the SOM clobbering, your honor.
    Just letting him know how it feels by poking back with a little fun. Perhaps
    now that all the alpha-male SOM intellectual arm wrestling is out of the way
    we can embark on a more rewarding dialogue. Or perhaps not, as the case may
    be.

    Mark 19-7-04: I'm at your service Dan. My aim is to help in any way my
    limited resources allow. If i confuse more than help then it's time for me to be
    moseying on down the trail. ;)

    >
    >Dan:
    >Thank you for your comments,
    >
    >Dan
    >
    >Mark 18c-7-04: And thank you for your comments also.

    You're welcome. Thank you too,

    Dan

    Mark 19-7-04: Thanks Dan.

    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 : Mon Jul 19 2004 - 14:41:14 BST