On 26 Jul 2010 at 18:57, Horse wrote:
Hmmm! Not sure that makes sense as subset and subordinate don't equate to each other. Did you actually mean to say: "By making the Intellectual level subordinate to the MOQ, thereby avoiding the disharmony of recursion"? Works either way for me. Or, I could have said, " By making the intellectual a subtopic of the MOQ, thereby avoiding the disharmony of recursion. Or, I could have said, "By making the intellectual level a smaller box contained within the the larger box of MOQ, thereby avoiding the disharmony of recursion. Or I could have said, By making the intellectual a subsidiary of the MOQ, thereby avoiding the disharmony of recursion. Or I could have said . . . well, I hope these few alternatives help clarify my meaning. On 26/07/2010 14:55, [email protected] wrote: > On 26 Jul 2010 at 14:28, Horse wrote: > > Could you explain this further Platt as I'm not sure what you mean by the > Intellectual Level being a subset of the MoQ. > > > On 26/07/2010 14:10, Platt Holden wrote: >>>> Bo'sinterpretation is better because it makes the MOQ more harmonious. >>>> >>>> Ron: >>>> Please explain how it makes the MOQ more harmonious. >>>> >> [Platt] >> By making the intellectual level a subset of the MOQ, thereby avoiding the >> disharmony of recursion. > Hi Horse, > > I used "subset" to mean "subordinate" as expressed by Pirsig in the Baggini > interview: > > " I think you are right. Let's drop the word, "absolute," and simply say that > "And in fact the Metaphysics of Quality actually supports the subject-object > distinction as a subordinate part of its own structure." " > l 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
