Joao Leao wrote:
> James N Rose wrote:
> > Joao Leao wrote:
> > >
> > > James N Rose wrote:
> > >
> > > > Joao,
> > > >
> > > > :-)   of course Plato wasn't aware of QM,
> > > > but, he was also unaware of the importance
> > > > that -mechanism- -real communication involvements-
> > > > are resident in any information relation situation,
> > > > as would be that which connects the Ideal and Real
> > > > and gives validation/meaning to any correspondences
> > > > cited or citable.
> > >
> > > I still have no idea of what you are talking about!
> > > Real communication involvements may be very
> > > important, but we are not having one here...
> >
> > Because there is no way you can leave your
> > mindset, see beyond it.  You think it is
> > the ultimate. Se la vie.
> It is written "C'est la Vie!" -- but let us leave it
> at this, before we are back in kindergaten...
> -Joao

You're welcome .. for not pointing out your
typos and minor spelling faux pas's (did I get 
that one right?).

Let's see, one version of derision - cloaked
in academic references - is valid, but, direct
enunciation that the debating opponent refuses
to consider alternative frames of reference
and association -- is not.

Another aspect of the unrelated-but-relevant
"Ideal" world, I take it.

BTW, I was quite happy platforming at
Second Year and moving onward; thought
you were up to it as well.

Sorry for having presented as so abrasive
right off the bat, but I there is no other
way to at least get the attention for the
entrenched non-apologist for one system of
thought or another and really place a dent
in the somnambulent inertia one typically
mires down into.

Refreshed language gets things moving where 
established rhetoric tends to reinforce
home-field advantage; more difficult for
the challenger, don't you know!  :-)

Anyway, to remove the garbage and re-post
the nitty gritty:

  "If there are no qualia but there are universals --
  which cannot be identified except via qualia --
  something is awry.

  If the Ideal "need not share relational
  aspects with any other domains"
  then that right off the bat kills
  any statements attempted between Ideal and Real."

These are not superfluous issues.  They challenge
the consistency and fundamentals of Platonism.
(They challenge the paradigm, not you its champion.)


Reply via email to