David M said to dmb:
..., so is this a form of anthropocentrism that your description of the MOQ is
proposing? I think that's a bad move,... I would rather see the MOQ as giving
us DQ and SQ that has more than human import and more than human origin. ...
Now if you limit the MOQ to human experience then you are not going to get or
see this. OK that may be what you want to do, but looks to me like this is a
conceptual and limiting trap, I suggest the MOQ needs to break out of the cave.
Are you happy to be in this trap?
dmb says:
Well, yes, this is a form of anthropocentrism, I suppose, but I don't think
it's a cave or a trap. I think it's an acknowledgement of the limits of what we
can know. It's a kind of epistemic humility wherein we can only make claims
about things knowable from experience.
"Man is not the source of all things, as the subjective idealists would say.
Nor is he the passive observer of all things, as the objective idealists and
materialists would say. The Quality which creates the world emerges as a
relationship between man and his experience. He is a participant in the
creation of all things. The measure of all things..." - Robert Pirsig
You just keep misunderstanding the MOQ in various ways while pretending to be
improving it. Sorry, David, but it's pretty clear to me that you're not really
talking about the MOQ.
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
