Marsha, I think you're on to something here. But I don't agree that going from the classic/romantic split to the dynamic/static was the key value of Lila compared to ZAMM.
I do agree with the author, that Lila is the more important book, philosophically. But imo, it's because Lila fully encapsulates that classic/romantic synthesis whereas ZAMM simply describes it. In another thread, I mentioned to Craig that we can't logically prove reality is good, but since it plainly is, this is a problem with logical proof, not reality. I think your spinning box sheds more light on the subject, gets closer to what I feel is the right way of looking at things, than I've read in countless meticulously logical arguments that I've come up with. So thanks for that. John 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
