Steve to Andre: We don't have to think that use of the word "cause" implies that one is stuck in SOM since it can be understand pragmatically (without metaphysics) and metaphysically (in the MOQ) as preference, as Value.
What has changed is the ontological status of causal relationships. Does smoking cause lung cancer? Does SOM cause philosophical Platypi? Are dirty plugs in the motorcycle the cause of the richness? Did Platt cause a lot of misunderstanding of the MOQ over the years? (Perhaps we ought to only say that misunderstanding valued Platt?) Andre: Hi Steve, by framing the above examples as questions you are leaving the possible answers open. The question of "A causing B" is still open. That is not the issue under discussion. Your answer therefore does not address my concern. The problem is the meaningfulness/usefulness of the statement: Smoking causes lung cancer. SOM causes philosophical platypuses. Richness causes dirty plugs in the motorcycle. Platt caused a lot of misunderstanding of the MOQ over the years. Remembering that the word 'cause' implies absolute certainty, isn't there anything problematic about these statements from a MOQ perspective, pragmatically and metaphysically? 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
