[Mark]
I don't think we need to see it as an endless paradox. We can assume
both structures are looking at each other.
[Arlo]
I assume here you mean a MOQ and "SOL" are structures looking at each
other. Are there other structures? Or just these two.
Still waiting to here if this new structure is DQ or SQ or some other
new non-SQ/non-DQ type of whatever.
[Mark]
This top down approach is not necessary in MOQ in my opinion, it can
be SSL (subject subject), or OOL (object object).
[Arlo]
So where do you place a MOQ then? As an intellectual pattern (along
with Pirsig) or as a superordinate fifth-level above intellect (along
with the SOLists)? Or somewhere else entirely?
Personally, I continue to be amazed that recursion scares so many
people, but I am convinced it does so because they are trapped in an
SOL world. They are still looking for a logically flawless, complete
system to describe everything, and "all this is just an analogy"
continues to elude them. As Goedel and others have show, the more
powerful the symbolic system is, the more useful it becomes, but also
the more unavoidably recursive and paradoxical it becomes. You can't
have it both ways. Me, I prefer the beautiful paradox and elegant
recursions pointed to so well in Margritte's The False Mirror.
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
