Hi dmb,  

On May 8, 2013, at 6:28 PM, david buchanan <[email protected]> wrote:

> dmb said:
> Again, the question is only whether or not logical contradictions are bad.
> 
> Marsha replied:
> Are they?  Hmmm.  It depends on context. 
> 
> ”The problem lies in the fact that Western intellectual history has been 
> intent upon creating an understanding that is founded upon universal laws, 
> and, in order to create such universal laws, we have attempted to eliminate 
> all objects of thought to which such laws do not universal apply.  This, 
> however, is irrational since there obviously are dynamic and holistic objects 
> of thought to which the laws of thought do not universally apply."
> 
> 
> 
> dmb says:
> This quote does not apply. The problem described in this quote is not 
> relevant to the question. The universal laws of thought are associated with 
> Platonism and the correspondence theory of truth. The MOQ rejects all that 
> and so do I. 
> 
> But the question remains and the answer is totally obvious; are logical 
> contradictions bad or not? Yes, of course they are. And given the context, 
> your contradictory use of the MOQ's key terms in a MOQ discussion group, that 
> particular contradiction is very, very bad.

Marsha:
To David Harding you wrote "logical contradictions", so I thought you were 
addressing the law of non-contradiction.  But if not, on what basis do you find 
contradiction?  Here is my explanation/definition:

--- Static patterns of value are repetitive processes (multiple events), 
conditionally co-dependent, impermanent and ever-changing, that pragmatically 
tend to persist and change within a stable, predictable pattern.  Within the 
MoQ, these patterns are morally categorized into a four-level, evolutionary, 
hierarchical structure:  inorganic, biological, social and intellectual. Static 
quality exists in stable patterns relative to other patterns.  Patterns have no 
independent, inherent existence. ---


> This is just another case wherein you foolishly misapply quotes that you 
> don't understand. Does the MOQ even have objects of conception? I don't think 
> so. Objects ARE concepts.

Marsha:  
Contradiction IS a concept.










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

Reply via email to