Hi Andre, > Andre: > > > In the MOQ subjects are social and intellectual patterns of > value, > > > objects are inorganic and organic patterns of values > > > I do not quite follow what point you are trying to make > [Mary Replies] > Yes, this is true as far as it goes, but what does it imply? Once > you've > accepted this premise, the next place it takes you is the me/not-me > dichotomy. This is equally true and cannot be otherwise if you accept > the > first. > > Andre: > You fundamentally misunderstand this MOQ premise: the me-not me > dichotomy. It is fundamentally a SOM postulate and not the MOQ one. If > you do not accept this we do not get off first base in understanding > the MOQ nor you accepting the first base of the MOQ premise. (make up > your mind!) > [Mary Replies] Me/not-me is what the MoQ teaches us to recognize. You have to recognize a thing before you can attempt to overcome it.
> Andre previously: > And what does it(i.e this intellectual pattern called MOQ)value? It > > values Truth as a species of Good. > > Mary replies: > I hope, by that, you do not mean what it appears to mean on the > surface. > That is, I sincerely hope you cannot define your terms. > > Andre: > And what is good Phaedrus,...? [Mary Replies] You will know it when you see it. The trick is being able to see it. Best, Mary 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/md/archives.html
