Ian:
> Ron, SA, (Bo) that's where you're being a too hard
> on Bo, but if Bo
> isn't coming back to my point, not sure what I can
> do to help.
SA: maybe... but I'll wrapped this up soon, but first
a response to you.
Ian:
> Yes the core of any metaphysics is axiomatic, and
> any choice of
> direction of ontological splitting, is just that a
> "deemed" choice.
> There cannot be any fundamental / defintive
> statement of why any one
> choice is better ... other than it works for as much
> of the
> experienced world as possible with minimum
> inconsistency and maximum
> completeness -
SA: Yes, of course, but this is Bo's fall back
position to when he can't argue his SOL anymore. When
you come up with something that boggles him, then he
falls back to this axiom and uses the axiom to state
his SOL is better and that he's using the real moq and
even Pirsig has failed in understanding his very own
moq. I'm just repeating what Bo has said. When one
argues the finer points of Bo's position, about the
static aspects of his position he falls back to the
axiom and uses this axiom to defend his SOL as the
real moq. It's tyranny. It's Hitler rising to power
saying he's the real Germany. I've never seen Bo
comment humbly, it's always his way and he denies
everybody else their perspectives.
The comment I gave about Bo not wanting to think
isn't me trying to make something up out of spite, I
really think Bo runs away from thinking and thought -
he has said repeatedly that thinking is the same SOM
that the moq has overcome.
windy,
SA
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/
