Marsha: The term 'many' as in my phrase "many scientists" represents a particular affirmative not a universal affirmative. So, of course, not all scientists have a subject-object metaphysical view.
On May 17, 2011, at 4:39 PM, Andre Broersen wrote: > Marsha: > Reification represents how the common man and many scientists, academics and > even philosophers think. It evolved as tool to facilitate some kind of > betterness. But it is flawed and of course the MoQ and help rectify the flaw. > > Andre: > You seem to be having some sort of antagonism towards the way scientists > operate. You seem to denigrate them because you seem to be thinking that all > their investigations operate from a SOM conviction and are therefore totally > misguided, wrong, off the path towards truth. > From a MOQ perspective may I suggest that the MOQ has no problem at all with > scientific findings and their truths? > > Would you allow the idea that some scientists are not at all restricted to > this SOM prison ( in fact that they do no know it exists) and feel themselves > quite nicely comfortable, nay compelled, to venturing outside of it...and > that their ideas and findings are very well accepted by 'conventional' > scientific institutions and accept these because they challenge, even though > they may not realize or understand the metaphysical implications of it? > > Scientific truths/results/findings keep on stacking themselves. Scientists > are not stupid. And reification is NOT the way they think! It is the way > they represent what they see and observe. This is NOT flawed. This is the > scientific way of communicating it. > > They are just not philosophers. > > ___ 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
