Okay, truth is seen as relative within the MoQ, relative to the individual like in special relativity and general relativity.
Sent from my iPad On Nov 24, 2011, at 8:24 PM, 118 <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Marsha, > > Yes, certainly do not reject a term without consideration. The goal > is to evaluate what is useful towards imparting meaning to MoQ. This > is what is meant by philosophical discussion. Along those lines, we > could consider the analogies provided by the Catholic Church as worthy > of consideration. Perhaps the notion that Christ died on the Cross > has meaning within MoQ. If, after discussion, we agree that it should > not, then we omit it. Any such rejection can always be revisited by > anyone if a reasonable case is put forth. > > dmb is providing such consideration to the term of Relativism which he > finds not compatible with MoQ. If you have your reasons to consider > it compatible, explain why, as you do with the post copied below. You > may have to continue to provide rhetoric in different ways as to why > it is important. However, you should give the same consideration to > Greek Orthodoxy which has much in common with MoQ. Do not summarily > reject the preachings of St. Paul without evaluation. The same can be > said for Hinduism, Buddhism, Protestantism, Capitalism and so forth. > What the aim is, is to bring value to MoQ and make it a world > philosophy. > > Just for clarification, the Quantum point-of-view does not include > relativity. This is because the concept of Relativity does not find > much usefulness in Quantum physics. However, if you feel that > relativity does belong in Quantum physics, then by all means, provide > your reasons. Relativity is used in the General Theory of Relativity, > and its more specific application in terms of moving clocks which is > termed the Special Theory of Relativity. You probably know this since > you are fond of bringing physics into the mix. The metaphysical > implications of the General Theory are unclear, although Godel tried > to do just that. He attempted to bridge the notion of time as it is > seen by cosmologists, that is a fabric know as "space-time", and our > intuitive knowledge of time. His result was that time cannot exist. > These are the difficulties when trying to apply concepts in physics > (that is the introduction of artificial systems of measurement) to > what we term metaphysics. > > I look forward to more discussions on why you feel Relativism is > important to MoQ. > > Cheers, > Mark > > > On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 11:31 PM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> As philosophy grapples with the implications of quantum physics, new >> points-of-view are evolving which challenge scientific materialism. >> Consciousness is being released from its confinement in the brain. Special >> relativity, general relativity, superposition, nonlocality, complementarity >> are new concepts being explored. When 'relativity' is such an important >> consideration in the new physics, it would be foolish to reject the therm. >> I am not trying to exclude any term. It's the small-minded who are trying >> to conflate, confuse and reject a term. I am not trying to label the MoQ as >> a form of Relativism. Truth is seen as relative within the MoQ, relative to >> the individual like in the Quantum point-of-view. >> >> >> >> Marsha >> >> >> >> ___ >> >> >> 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 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
