Hi Bo > > It's troubles definitely and they stems from it's metaphysics claim, > but it's equally important to keep its advantages, something the > SOL takes care of.
yes it has its uses. > >> Consciousness and materiality do not need to be joined up because they >> have never been apart in reality-experience until sundered apart by >> SOM. > > There were no consciousness (as different from what it is > conscious of) nor "materiality" before SOM, these are SOM's > creations. As said to (someone) you will not find these concepts > in the pre-intellectual documents (the Old Testament books > Pirsigs says) you're saying the same thing in different words >> Hence Pirsig says that we cannot banish under MOQ ideas like molecules >> chosing their bonds, ideas that SOM bans for its metaphysical reasons. >> Seems to me too many people here want to proclaim the MOQ with one hand >> and add back all the distinctions of SOM with the other. > > No need to be coy Roy, I guess I'm the target here. No you're not I admit to > proclaiming the MOQ with one hand and add back the S/O > distinctions with the other, but can't you get into your head the > difference between the S/O distinction as a static good and as a > metaphysical "evil"? > I am entirely aware of this important distinction hope that clarifies DM 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/
