So Craig, Steve, ... that SOMist discrepancy (problem) between concepts and SOMist reality, that inevitable, (fundamental) relationship between the static and dynamic, so hard to define in SOMism, is recast by MoQism as a reality more fundamental than SOmist reality.
At the risk of being crass, we change the name for this thing bad (problem / discrepancy) to good (quality / fundamental reality) and get on with living quality. Are we nearly there yet ? Ian On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 10:45 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "In his last unfinished work, Some Problems of Philosophy, James had > condensed this description to a single sentence: "There must always be a > discrepancy between concepts and reality, because the former are static and > discontinuous while the latter is dynamic and flowing." Here James had chosen > exactly the same words Phaedrus had used for the basic subdivision of the > Metaphysics of Quality. > What the Metaphysics of Quality adds to James's pragmatism and his radical > empiricism is the idea that the primal reality from which subjects and > objects spring is value. By doing so it seems to unite pragmatism and > radical empiricism into a single fabric." > (RMP, "Lila", p. 418) > 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/ > 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/
