At 03:18 PM 9/20/2007, Ham wrote:
>[Ham, previously]:
> > Value cannot be primary unless your concept of ultimate reality is
> > differentiated existence, subjectively realized. I assume from your
> > "special definition" that you exclude the possibility of a metaphysical
> > reality.
>
>[Marsha]:
> > If by 'metaphysical reality' do you mean theology?
> > Then yes I do exclude it.
>
>Theology is a word most people associate with a Supreme Being. Have I ever
>defined Essence as a Being? That's a red herring, Marsha, and I'm sure you
>know it. One can valuistically call what is absolute "supreme", but this
>relational description has no metaphysical significance.
Greetings Ham,
Much of this post is beyond my ability to unpack its essence, so I
pulled out an obvious question. It seems I misinterpreted your
meaning, so I'll let you explain. What is this 'metaphysical
reality', you think is being excluded?
Curiously,
Marsha
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
