Hello Bo,
It is the Ron you know, I hope this fact does not lead you to tune my words out.
I had said:
MoQ dissolves S/O by saying they are both static patterns
>of value. Both the menu and the reality we percieve. SOM typically
>understands that "entities" and "entites understood" are the same in
>objective reason and are assumed as reality itself. much the way you
>posit MoQ as being reality itself when MoQ specifically states as a
>core tenet that reality, Quality, is dynamic and may not be defined
>nor understood less it become static.
Bo:
It's difficult to catch your meaning, at the least the MOQ dissolves
SOM by making the S/O aggregate *) its own intellectual level! Inside
that level however the "S" corresponds to the menu and the "O" to
reality, thus if the MOQ is regarded an intellectual pattern it becomes a
menu describing MOQ .... and the Quality Idea is gone with the wind
Ron:
Slow that down for me, walk me through this, you say the MoQ
dissolves the s/o split by encasing it within itself as the intellectual
level, leaving MoQ as a meta-level a 5th level if you will (reality you say).
Would you please define for me then how MoQ(reality) dissolves s/o
with DQ/SQ ?
so in effect, in your interpretation the order would be:
1: MoQ (reality)
2: SOM (intellect)
3: social
4: organic
5: inorganic
By traditional logical systems, this hierarchy is incomplete and inconsistent.
please explain the emergence of the inorganic level from reality. Please explain
how this interpretation differs from subjectivism or solopsism.
Thank you Bo
.
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/
