Mark had said:
Hi David, You are so far off base, that I don't even know where to start. This seems to be your logic: The MOQ claims that a description is degenerate Since the MOQ claims that a description is degenerate, it is different from mysticism which does not claim this. [Ron] What I have gleaned from Dave H is that there is a kind of Mystic that would end an inquirey with the indefineable and rest on it, arresting any further intellectual growth. A rigid static pattern concening the dynamic. Mark continues: My question is what exactly are you trying to prove here? You can say that MOQ is different from mysticism as loudly as you want, but your logic does not prove a thing except that you have made the rule that a description is degenerate. [Ron] Dave seems to be asserting that MoQ's mysticism promotes intellectual growth in contrast. Mark explains: You are resorting to the old logic that is used for God. God is undefinable, therefore we cannot describe him. If we do, we are worshiping at the alter of a false god. If this were indeed true, it would make the bible useless, in the same way that you are presenting that MOQ only misdirects one from the true nature of Quality. [Ron] This really has interested me, for I feel that the faithfull misinterpret that edict often also. Here I believe you begin to join Dave in his criticism against arresting intellectual development, that any kind of description runs foul. This is what he means by making the distinction between differing types of mysticism, so there is no real cause to continue the snark train since you seem to be attacking the very thing he is. If he is that far off base, then you also seem to be in that catagory. .. . 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
