Ron:
...I would note the type of dichotomy so as to not confuse your subscribers, which was my main point, once you start down a path of analytic propositions you are kinda committed to it and if you start making synthetic statements from analytical ones, some may use this as an excuse to render the whole concept as null and void. Crucifying you with your own analytical statements.
Thanks for the tip, Ron, although since many already consider the whole concept null and void, I doubt that changing an analytic "dichotomy" to a synthetic "complementarity" will matter much. I would prefer that they understood the concept on its own merits rather than judge it on logical grounds.
I have learned from our exchanges, too, Ron. As an authority on logic, perhaps you can help me with my Creation Hypothesis. The problem here is my use of a "negated agent" which defies traditional logic. Are you familiar with Cusa's principle of the "not-other"? If you're willing to tackle this challenge, I'm your humble student.
Kindest regards, Ham 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/
