Ron to dmb: ...Cause is dependant and relational and his logical tetralemma is used to "logically" arrive at this conclusion.
dmb says: I suppose this is designed to defeat a position that says cause is independent and not relational, but I have no idea what could mean. This is what I mean by being dropped into the middle of an argument. Now I wonder who was saying it and what its supposed to mean. Not even sure what the topic is. Are we talking about causality in the sense that physics uses it? Sure doesn't make any sense to say that is independent and not relational. By definition, a cause is something that effects something else, no? Appreciate the effort, but I don't think I'm ready to handle this guy. In this case, I really am clueless. But if it really is ultimately "empty" of "true" meaning, then maybe cluelessness is a good thing. _________________________________________________________________ Got Game? Win Prizes in the Windows Live Hotmail Mobile Summer Games Trivia Contest http://www.gowindowslive.com/summergames?ocid=TXT_TAGHM 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/
