> djh said: > ..."As I keep explaining - I think that it is Marsha's extreme love of *DQ* > which is destroying her ability to appreciate the 'staticness' of > intellectual values. > > dmb responded: > .;Yea, Marsha uses her love of DQ to shit on intellectual values. Obviously. > And stating the obvious helps how, exactly? Seriously, David, you cannot > possibly believe that this is news to anyone. > > I think this shows that your suggestion is quite worthless. Would you like to > show me something that isn't already in plain sight? Or would you prefer to > continue with the vague and useless platitudes? >
djh responds: I love how you think that values are 'vague'. They're the whole thing dmb! Not this dialectical truth which you seem to be holding so tight onto.. > dmb also said: > Concepts and reality, David. They are two different things. This is the point > you're not getting and you've now painted yourself into the same paralyzing, > anti-intellectual corner. Fair warning; people get stuck in this corner for > years. (** dmb shutting dowwwwwwwwwnnnnn**) :-) djh responds: I further love how you think that I'm 'anti-intellectual' when I've been in an intellectual discussion with you for over a week now. As part of this intellectual conversation which we two intellectuals have been having - I've also explained how concepts (sq) and ultimate reality (DQ) are indeed two different things to the point that they're in opposition! So clearly I value two things you have accused me of not valuing. Yet despite that - it seems you just continue to want to have a dialectical argument with me. It seems it doesn't really matter what you accuse me of so long as you can prove some aspect of what I say is 'incorrect' (according to the logic resulting from what you already know) then that's all that matters. This is how dialectic works - You have your own understanding of how logical things are and if - what someone else says is contrary to that logic - then attacking them on this lack of logic is what's important. Values, what's good - be damned - let's find the dialectical truth! Dialectic --- the usurper of all that is good…. "Phaedrus' mind races on and on and then on further, seeing now at last a kind of evil thing, an evil deeply entrenched in himself, which pretends to try to understand love and beauty and truth and wisdom but whose real purpose is never to understand them, whose real purpose is always to usurp them and enthrone itself. Dialectic...the usurper. That is what he sees. The parvenu, muscling in on all that is Good and seeking to contain it and control it.. " What's better is if you *first* look at what's good - what someone values. You put yourself in their shoes - try and see what they see. *Then* attack them on any perceived lack of quality or logic - but not before. This is the whole point to my original post. Some folks on here don't seem to look at what folks value first and then their logic. It seems you make this mistake.. You're just comparing what folks say to what you already know and your own logic - regardless of what they value! This is just ugly dialectic 101… Case in point - Our conversation! 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
