Re: MD Mislead or lie? III.

From: Platt Holden (pholden@sc.rr.com)
Date: Sun Aug 01 2004 - 22:37:18 BST

  • Next message: Valuemetaphysics@aol.com: "MD Mislead or lie? II."

    Hi MM, DMB, Horse, All

    DMB and I rarely agree on anything, but in the case of Mark's "coherence"
    interpretations of the MOQ, I couldn't agree with DMB more. Mark's
    "coherence" theory is, for the most part, incoherent.

    For example, I defy Mark on anyone to explain in plain English what this
    means:.

    >Coherence, the interrelation of DQ
    > and sq, or better said, sq-sq tension attempts to convey instances of
    > unity.

    Or this:

    > The
    > Penguin English dictionary says coherence is: b. showing a unity of thought
    > or purpose. Therefore, an ultimate unity would be an ultimate unity of
    > purpose. i.e. The ultimate purpose is a unity.

    I wish I had DMB's patience in laying out all the reasons why Mark's
    obsession with coherence doesn't hold water. But I have neither the time
    nor the inclination. When anybody writes so that the reader has to work
    hard to comprehend what the author is trying to say, why bother? Life is
    too short.

    Yes, yes. I know all about "context." But, you can't expect readers to
    know your context. You have to reach them in their contexts if you hope to
    persuade.

    The common meaning of "coherent" is: "That makes sense." To use the word
    in any other way just makes for a whole lot of confusion and ultimately
    much nonsense.

    So in this case, I'm going with DMB's flow. :-)

    Platt

    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 : Sun Aug 01 2004 - 22:43:06 BST