Hi Marsha, > I ended our last discussion when you took my comment about 'artificially > isolating process' and paraphrased it as 'artificial patterns'. I don't find > that style of paraphrasing conducive to a productive discussion. > > I have explained my position clearly. I prefer to call objects of knowledge > 'static patterns of value' or 'patterns' and prefer to see them as > hypothetical as I have explained. I find 'hypothetical' a high value pattern > and ascetically beautiful, and it does match my experience that situations > change and there is always more to consider. I find 'truth' and your > insistence that I use it too dogmatic, and I do not like being forced to play > an either/or game. The MoQ accommodates multiple intellectual realities and > doesn't insist on yours being the only one. > > Thank you for the time you have given thus far to the 'It's all analogy. > Does this change anything?' thread, but I do not want to continue into a > debate over 'truth' versus 'hypothetical'.
My interpretation is not the only one. Yours, just as everything, has value. This is my point. I am not here to determine the absolute 'true' opinion. I chat with people on here so I can understand their viewpoint and see the value in what they are saying. If what they are saying is better than how I see things, then that's awesome because it means by understanding I have become a better person. If what they are saying is not better, or if what they are saying confuses me, I will say so, so that I can learn and talk it through and thus we can become better people.. I'm not interested in a 'truth' verses 'hypothetical' debate. You will remember however that it was your quote which you have posted on MD probably 100 times that de-emphasised the importance of truth and put these two things in opposition... "Rather than use the concept/word 'truth', I prefer to think of objects of knowledge as hypothetical." That fascinates me because I see the value in both of these things. I thought I made that clear in my last post where I wrote: "To put it another way - yes I suppose (create a hypothetical that) some patterns describe reality beautifully. The supposition(hypothetical) is the act of trying them out. Just as I'm 'supposing' your truths right now. But then, I still make the conclusion that that there are *actually* better truths. " There is value in both hypothetical and actual truth. At the emphasis of one, you're neglecting the other. Both are important… In other words, yes it's good to see objects of knowledge as hypothetical. But then eventually you need to test those hypotheticals against reality and create some high quality intellectual patterns(true) conclusions about reality as a result. Thanks Marsha, -David. 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
