At 10:21 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 > >Hello Marsha. > >No, no that's not what I'm asking. I don't really know what I am asking, >except.. > >In your book, is the MOQ a intellectual pattern of value? One that is of >Higher Value than SOM?
Greetings Chris, If it uses words to describe or define the MOQ, it is in most cases as a metaphysical theory, an Intellectual STATIC pattern of value, a pointing to the moon. >And is there a difference between a "Quality Understanding of things" and >the MOQ? If so, what? I'm not clear on what you are asking. I'm just seeing words. Marsha Hi Chris, Yes, I do think the MOQ is of higher value than SOM because it is a monism rather than a dualism. Marsha 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/
