John to Arlo: The way it seems to me is you assign atheism a higher moral value than theism, like the former is intellectual and the latter is social. But that is not a valid conclusion. A true objective discussion begins open-mindedly from the metaphysically given, rather than the emotionally attached dogmas.
Andre: No wonder Arlo is pissed off ( not that I am suggesting so Arlo). If this type of reasoning is not SOM bullcrap, I am lost. LILA is an attempt to draw deeper understanding from the SOM paradoxes it has struggled with for centuries. It (LILA) has resolved a number of these and, in turn has created its own paradoxes but now in the form of koans, i.e. not the SOM, dialectical ( turning its target into an object and hereby 'I can trap you' attitude i.e. a stifling of the persuit towards truth notion) method, but ones that can free the intellectual level and freely incorporate those insights it has been denied of itself for so long. This is where I have an issue with Bodvar: In the MoQ the intellectual level is not boxed in, not like the MoQ has done with SOM. The MoQ static intellectual level is 'open' unlike 'intellect'...the S/O aggregate which seems a SOM construction to me). Intuition, imagination, non-algorithmic reasoning (as Reanney puts it) i.e artfully, aesthetically, immediate-quality-inspired). These are high quality intellectual values. They are only static for as long as they last, just because it is open/receptive to DQ, the open end of the circle. I ask you John: What is 'open-minded' in the context within which you use it? cheers Andre 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/
