Marsha:
Sorry there seems to be too many hidden assumptions left out of your post for
me to make sense of it. The only thing I might offer to negate the charge of
nihilism is that static quality is not annihilated. Static quality is
conventionally real.
[Ron]
But it neglects the explanation of WHY and HOW static quality exists,
conventionally or otherwise.
RMP is definitly trying to account for and explain the hanging together of
experience and DQ as "betterness"
explains movement and why experience changes. "not this-not that" seems to fail
in this regard.
I therefore suspect that "not this-not that" is contextual towards dialectical
opposition in arguementation and to
swap it out for betterness in "Lila" nullifies half the book, everything he
says about preference and evolution
is just thrown out.
Perhaps you can explain how "not this-not that" fits together to explain beauty
and attraction and why some
things are better than others. Because I can't seem to see how that works.
thnx
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
