Hi dmb, No problem, happy to oblige. Mark On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 6:07 PM, david buchanan <[email protected]>wrote:
> > It's funny how all the evidence and reason goes missing from your response, > especially since you tend to duplicate everything whether it's relevant or > not. It's funny how this laziness evaporates when there's reason and > evidence worth deleting. > Thanks for proving my point. > > > > > Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2010 16:25:47 -0800 > > From: [email protected] > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: [MD] Betternes - 4 levels of! > > > > Hey Marsha, > > I hear you. I thought we had gotten over this whole concept of what is > more > > True. I thought that was in ZMM. Perhaps my interpretation is different > > than some others. While I may be an egoist, I stand corrected all the > time. > > So, at least you are not talking about me. > > > > Who's got that flag with the Big Q on it? Why is he running around > > erratically pushing people out of his way? Where is he off to, seems > like > > circles to me? Saw that on a farm once, when we went out to get > something > > for dinner from the chicken coop. Tasted pretty good cooked though. > > > > Mark > > > > On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 12:23 PM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > dmb, > > > > > > I am convinced in the same way that egotists are incorrigible for > > > psychological reasons and they cannot or will not be corrected by > evidence > > > or reason. When, for instance, they deny that truth within the MoQ is > > > relative while the MoQ Textbook clearly states "the MOQ follows a > pragmatic > > > notion of truth so truth is seen as relative in his system while > Quality is > > > seen as absolute." > > > > > > > > > Marsha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 9, 2010, at 1:34 PM, david buchanan wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > dmb says: > > > > > > > > I'm convinced that theists are incorrigible for psychological reasons > and > > > they cannot or will not be corrected by evidence or reason. And if > that's > > > where you're at, so to speak, your place is in a church and you > shouldn't be > > > surprised when your theism is not well received in a philosophy > discussion. > > > Considering the atheistic and even anti-theistic stance of the MOQ's > author, > > > you'd have to be a bit nuts to think that kind of thing would fly in > this > > > context. Waving the theism flag around here is way beyond mere > confusion, my > > > friend. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ___ > > > > > > > > > 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 > > > > > 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 > > 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 > 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
