[Horse]
Illusions exist - they just aren't what we assume they are. They are
representations of reality, not reality itself.
[Arlo]
I had understood the "illusion" to be the primacy of subjects and
objects. Within a MOQ, patterns are "real", but that reality is
defined empirically, or experientially, or pragmatically, rather than
existentially.
So within a MOQ framework, I don't know if I'd say anything like
"static patterns are illusions", I'd say the opposite, that "static
patterns are real", its the "S/O" primacy that has defined what
"real" meant that is the illusion, and saying "patterns are real" is
an empirical statement and not an existential one.
In other words, if we are talking about "subjects" and "objects",
we'd call them "illusions" because they are the fallout of the
greater S/O fallacy. In this case, the illusion is that they exist
independently or existentially apart from experiential value.
But if we are talking about "MOQ patterns", and we understand how a
MOQ reconceptualizes the meaning of "real", then I'd say they are not
illusions, but that these patterns are quite real.
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
