Ham: > Subject to these conditions, why should the issue of moral values even > arise, let alone be endlessly debated in a philosophy forum?
Dan: Well, Ham, it certainly has opened up a hornets' nest. I am a bit frustrated myself that some of us have such trouble seeing what it is that the MOQ is saying about free will vs. determinism. I am guessing that a person outside the framework of the MOQ (so to speak) cannot form a proper understanding with the notion of Dynamic freedom/static determinism, thus I thought perhaps it might be fruitful to answer your post as best I can. John has grown increasingly belligerent and Ron clearly supports John's notions that static quality choices are available to us all. Thankfully, Marsha and Joe seem to get what I am saying. Ron: Dan I understand RMP's quote within it's context, in regard to the intellectual debate involving freewill and determinism. But if we go back to the initial disagreement: "Hello Dan, you had stated to John >>Dan: >> I think the confusion is thinking that having a choice is freedom. >> Conventionally, that is so. But we are not talking conventionally >> here. We are using the framework of the MOQ. To have a choice is >> follow intellectual patterns of value and when we are dealing with >> static quality, we are without choice." Ron: But then you change the context to the application of the framework of the MoQ and you state that within that framework static patterns do not exercise choice. In fact you follow this statement clarifying this point of view with: Dan: > We may think we are making a choice but within the > framework of the MOQ, that is an illusion. Ron: You then led me to the understanding that where MoQ points to is Dynamic Quality which you also link with the idea of "freedom from choice". And you claimed that these are not your own contentions that they are indeed THE MoQ's. I draw from this: 1. Choice is an illusion 2. Dynamic Quality is freedom from the illusion of choice. 3. Dynamic Quality is best understood as "not this, not that" The counter arguement I make 1: Choice is reality, every last bit 2. Dynamic Quality is natural selection at work 3.Dynamic Quality is best understood as "betterness" Making it a conflict of meaning between the ideas freedom from choice and freedom is choice. I think that the consequences of each makes enough of a difference that a dialog concerning it directly influences the meaning and intent of any "THE MoQ." I thought we were having some rather good discussions concerning it. 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
