On Dec 30, 2010, at 4:34 PM, ARLO J BENSINGER JR wrote: > [Marsha] > Nowhere did I explicitly state that language was SOM. It does, though, > implicitly suggest a subject-object metaphysical underpinning. > > [Arlo] > No. It does not. Language has nothing to do inherently with "SOM". SOM is very > particular metaphysical position that understands the primary division of the > world to be "subjects" and "objects". > > What you are doing, again, is confusing the "subjects" and "objects" of > language with a subject-object metaphysics. >
Marsha: "Pirsig uses the term ‘subject-object metaphysics’ (SOM) for any metaphysics (explicitly or implicitly) that perceives reality as either mind and/or matter such as idealism, materialism, and dualism. " (MoQ Textbook) ___ 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
