On Apr 20, 2012, at 2:43 PM, david buchanan <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Marsha asked dmb:
> What does "Unlike subject-object metaphysics the Metaphysics of Quality does
> not insist on a single exclusive truth." (LILA, Chapter 8) mean to you?
>
>
> dmb says:
> It's a rejection of objective truth, a rejection of the correspondence theory
> of truth and an endorsement of pluralism.
Marsha:
Ending the same paragraph, RMP wrote:
"There are many sets of intellectual reality in existence and we can perceive
some to have more quality than others, but that we do so is, in part, the
result of our history and current patterns of values."
> Dmb continues:
> But that certainly does NOT mean that truth can include incoherent nonsense
> or self-serving bullshit.
Marsha:
It does not mean that truth can include incoherent nonsense or self-serving
bullshit such as you, dmb, presented on Apr 10, 2012, at 1:33 PM, in the tread:
Re: [MD] Awareness and consciousness in the MoQ, when you wrote to me:
"Everything you post in this forum is evidence of your anti-intellectualism,
including all the misunderstood quotes you post and today is no exception.".
When I asked you to provide my exact statements and cite the posts they were
taken from, you went silent, which left your comment in the column titled
'Unsubstantiated Self-Serving Bullshit'. Further, when I asked you to define
the 'intellectual' in your use of 'anti-intellectualism', you again went
silent. So once again your comment goes into the column entitled
'Unsubstantiated Self-Serving Bullshit'. And this time we can add it was
incoherent since you could not provide understanding or definition for
'intellectual'. I also think your use of the word 'Everything' from
"Everything you post", and
you've been warned before, is proof of you illogic. It is a universal
qualifier and it would only take one instance of me showing appreciation of
anything "intellectual" to prove you wrong. In the same post I am quoted as
showing my admiration for epistemology, metaphysics, philosophy in general, and
the MoQ. You are, therefore, proven wrong.
> dmb:
> Rejecting a single exclusive truth does not mean rejecting things like
> agreement with experience, logical consistency, explanatory power, clarity
> and other kinds of intellectual quality.
Marsha:
I agree, but you have not demonstrated you know or understand what constitutes
clarity and/or logical consistence.
> dmb:
> It does NOT mean that Marsha gets to make up whatever she likes and then call
> it truth.
Marsha:
It does not mean you, dmb, gets to make up whatever he likes and then call it
truth.
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
