On Aug 15, 2010, at 12:16 PM, David Thomas wrote: > Marsha, > >> I think your quote may be in the Copleston Annotation: >> >> "The MOQ is not opposed to materialism as long is it is >> understood that materialism is a set of ideas." >> > No actually it is this one from the SODV paper: > >> The bottom box shows inorganic patterns. The Metaphysics of Quality says >> objects are composed of "substance" but it says that this substance can be >> defined more precisely as "stable inorganic patterns of value." This added >> definition makes substance sound more ephemeral than previously but it is >> not. >> The objects look and smell and feel the same either way. The Metaphysics of >> Quality agrees with scientific realism that these inorganic patterns are >> completely real, and there is no reason that box shouldn't be there, but it >> says that this reality is ultimately a deduction made in the first months of >> an infant's life and supported by the culture in which the infant grows up. > > This last sentence, properly understood, pulls together philosophical pieces > from; philosophical realism, pragmatism, radical empiricism, and the MoQ. > > No religious mysticism required for understanding. > > Dave
Dave, Oh dear,,, But I cannot imagine that scientific realism would be any different than materialism, both are a set of ideas. I wouldn't deny experience either, but what we know is value patterns. Marsha ___ 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
