Bo said: I must repeat that the greatest goof was to introduce a Quality/Concept "meta-metaphysics" which is playing straight into SOM's hand. ..As Krimel points to there is nothing outside of language ...IF ONE ACCEPTS SOM's of an objective reality "out there" fundamentally different from our conceptual language .... and so Pirsig and you obviously have done. Good Grief!
dmb says:The MOQ says there is always a discrepancy between thoughts and reality and SOM says there are subjective ideas and objective reality are discrete, discontinuous entities. In both cases we have a distinction but that's about all there is to the similarity. Since the MOQ denies subjects and objective reality ARE concepts, it's just plain goofy to say that Pirsig's distinction amounts to SOM. In the MOQ, it is a simple container problem. In the MOQ, experience IS reality. The primary empirical reality is undifferentiated or pre-conceptual while concepts ARE differentiations. I mean, you've confused two completely different distinctions. But then, I've already responded to this charge several times. To make it stick, don't you need to show that the MOQ's distinction between concepts and reality is the same as SOM's distinction between words and what's "out there"? And isn't that impossible because in the MOQ, there is no "out there" there. In the MOQ "out there" IS a concept, not reality. _________________________________________________________________ Lauren found her dream laptop. Find the PC that’s right for you. http://www.microsoft.com/windows/choosepc/?ocid=ftp_val_wl_290 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/
