> > Ron: > If Hypothisis are imaginary, then they may not be observed or directly > experienced. It is seeking knowledge beyond the scope of experience > thus all your associations with flying pigs. It seems you are being > purposly inconsistant to try to spin this conversation with rhetorical > slights of > hand. Not working. For someone who claims not to be a philosopher or know > much about philosophy you sure act smug in your assumptions about it.
Dan: So once you're backed into a corner you bring out the insults... again... I am not the one who brought up flying pigs, Robert Pirsig brought them up. Ron: I'm not backed into a corner you are just being purposly dense. It's frustrating. You do not even try to understand what I'm trying to communicate to you. I can't understand if you are trying to be provocative and are just coming off as a dick or you just really are that thick. > > Ron: >> Hypothisis have value and as Pirsig would say, that which has value >> is "real". New York, dog dishes and trees that are pre-supposed, like quarks >> and symmetries >> are "real" in the same way because they have value. > > Dan: > > For a minute I thought we were making progress but no... if I > presuppose flying pigs do they have value? > > Ron: > Well Dan if they have value within the context of a conversation, yes. Dan: I see there is little use in continuing our discussion. You are either a fool or playing at being one, or both. Ron: Flying pigs, like truth and justice have value when these ideas have meaning within a context. Hey, Pirsigs the one positing that not only things but thoughts about things are "real" they are experience..so if your calling anyone a fool it's him. Things=inorganic/organic thoughts about things=social/intellectual.. fool. Ron: > There is not much you are making clear except your lack of consistency within > a conversation. Dan: Then let us end it now. Ron: Yea, thats probably the best idea you offered yet. > >> Ron: >> Thats why it is being said that the problem lies in the kinds of questions >> that are being asked. > > Dan: > > What better questions would you suggest? > > Ron: > In other words Dan an MoQist wouldnt ask those questions if he understood the > MoQ. Dan: That is not what you said... you said the problem is in the kind of questions being asked. So you're now saying no questions should be asked. That is your position. It seems odd to me but so be it. Ron: If you are too dense to see that the problem with the kinds of questions is that they are questions an SOMist would ask not an MoQist,,,and if you are an MoQist, then those questions arent asked, then maybe some careful re-reading is in order on your behalf. ...peace out .. 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
