Ron,
Maybe you can provide where I stated that "reification IS the basis of all conception". Especially where I yesterday sent a quote stating: "I think I have suggested that reification was either a part of the conceptualization process, or that there was a interdependency between conceptualization and reification." Marsha On May 30, 2011, at 8:46 AM, X Acto wrote: > > > Ron, > > Why don't you explain how you understand the contradiction. > > > Marsha > > > ''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' > > Well, for starters, this quote tends to say it all... > > "From a centrists perspective, ontological absolutism is based on the mental > distortion known as reification." > > Meaning, that from a pragmatic point of view > > " As theory is not purely determined by some intrinsic nature of >> reality, there is no one conceptual system that uniquely accounts for the >> myriad >> >> of natural phenomena" > > you are taking a position of an ontological absolutism when you assert that > the > mental > distortion known as reification IS the basis of all conception. This > assertion > demands that > there is only one conceptual system that uniquely accounts for the myriad of > natural > phenomena contending that salvation from it is the subdueing or "killing" of > it. > Wallace talks about reification as a "tendancy". > > This is the difference I see between yours and Wallaces point of view > regarding > reification. > > > > -Ron > > > > .......................................................................................... > 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 ___ 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
