Ron,
I asked you in another post in this thread, who
came up with the SOL interpretation as being an
interpretation of culture and transculture? Was it
you or Bo? Can't you answer these questions or maybe
you haven't had the time to get to these questions
yet?
SA
> Marsha:
> I understood Lila's soliloquy a little differently.
> I think of her as
> stating that to name/define something is to kill it.
> To make it static
> and kill off the dynamic aspects. And in this
> sense, it is exactly why
> I do not like Bo's idea of creating a MOQ level. To
> confine Quality, or
> DQ, to a level may make it static. It's also the
> reason I don't like
> Ham's use of the words 'primary' and 'purpose'. To
> my thinking Quality
> (DQ) is best left is indivisible, undefinable and
> unknowable, and for
> Bo's case, unconfined.
>
> Marsha,
> Agreed, cultural definitions of quality kill its
> dynamic aspect
> Especially when the cultural definitions are taken
> as a truth.
>
> The whole understanding hinges on the idea that
> culture creates
> The individual as much as the individual creates
> culture. One does not
> Exist without the other.
> Therefore A cultural paradigm is required for any
> understanding of an
> intellectual concept.
> There fore Bo is not defining Quality, he is
> pointing out that we
> Still view MoQ through SOM eyes no matter how much
> we try not to.
> Or tell ourselves we are not. By saying we truly
> view Moq as it is
> And dropping SOM we are actually commiting the same
> fallacy of
> Taking SOM as true.
> So it is best to realize that this is the condition
> we are in
> When viewing the MoQ and important we do not succumb
> to the same trap
> In understanding. Most of us realize this but
> putting our finger on it
> helps in understanding what others mean in this
> forum. And yes perhaps
> Some of us failed to notice this before. I think a
> large part of
> The conflict Ham has with MoQ is just this SPOV, Ham
> is well
> Steeped in traditional analytic philosophy and views
> MoQ concepts
> >From this perspective. Quality does not hold up for
> him because
> Outside of a cultural definition it vanishes. It
> loses all meaning.
> He loses it in the paradigm shift. I suspect by some
> of the comments
> Bo has made about mysticism leads me to believe that
> he also
> Doesn't clearly see this shift and the role it plays
> in understanding.
> -Ron
> 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/
>
____________________________________________________________________________________
Looking for last minute shopping deals?
Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping
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/
