Hi Andre and All, Quite a diatribe! DQ is not SQ and SQ is not DQ. If DQ/SQ is the source of knowledge and DQ and SQ are not definable as different then metaphysics are not a different logical discipline from physics. Mathematics and its inability to describe evolution (one is not one) becomes the language of metaphysics. Metaphysics becomes a tempest in a teapot.
I am aware of DQ, and I am aware o SQ. I think there is an analogical awareness of existence describing the two, not a logical awareness of existence. Evolution describes levels in existence. All individuals in evolution do not have the same relationship to existence! Joe On 6/28/12 2:09 PM, "Andre Broersen" <[email protected]> wrote: > It seems to me that DQ (on its own) is not, as you suggest unity, oneness, > whole. Sq is, for the same reason not unity, oneness, whole. No, both are > (Dq/sq). The simple reasoning being: how do you know unity, oneness, whole? > They are static conceptions...and how are you aware of DQ except from a static > point of view? 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
