At 09:43 AM 4/22/2008, you wrote:
>Marsha, and Everyone I think > >I Think I get what Bo means by this: To a SOMist everything is subject and >object. To a MOQist everything is Quality. If you ask both of them: "but >hey, where did Objects/Quality come from?" both of them will answer that 'it >was always there', perhaps adding: 'waiting to be recognized by us humans.' > >That, and a religious understanding of things isn't part of a system, it is >what makes a system possible. > >But I will ask Bo this then, how does the MOQ and the SOM differ? > >In fact, I will ask all of you that. Hi Chris, Are you asking what is the difference between monism and dualism? Marsha > >>I don't quite get your point, the fact that reality's (=Quality's) > >>dynamic component is part of the MOQ can't by no twist of logic > >>be a "definition" and thus an desecration. I used the example of > >>religions that postulate a God/World split, but God is still as > >>sacred. Yet, it struck me just now, this may have wider > >>ramifications. The pious thinks that God is from before "religion", > >>is it the same piety that surfaces as a demand about a Quality > >>from before the MOQ? > > >>Bo > > > > Greetings Bo, > > > > My point is that to put DQ in a box, or metalevel, is a definition > > (maybe visual) of containment. > > > > When you talk about god, I haven't any idea what you are talking about. > > > > 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/ Shoot for the moon. Even if you miss, you'll land among the stars... 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/
