dmb said: Apparently you don't really understand what SOM means because your intended denial is actually a confession. You've shown that your "pre-conceptual SQ" is no different from the pre-existing objects of SOM. You're talking about patterns as something that "must exist prior to human experience and prior to human conceptions". That's exactly what we mean by "pre-existing objects" and that is exactly what static patterns are NOT. The MOQ rejects these pre-existing objects and replaces them with static patterns. You are literally offering the problem as an alternative to the solution. No wonder you don't appreciate my criticisms of Marsha. Wow.
DM: Nonsense on stilts, hardly worthy of a reply really, but I guess you can't understand the difference between SOM and realism, I guess philosophy is not your thing, never mind. dmb said: Plus, since the MOQ describes DQ as pre-conceptual experience and it describes sq as derived concepts, your phrase would mean "pre-conceptual concepts". To say that this phrase is contradictory or incoherent is not a personal attack on you. It is simply of point of logic and the proper use of terms. ... DM: Not what I said at all, confused? Can't read, who knows what your problem is? I can't help you. If this is the best you can offer you must be unable to offer any serious challenge to what I have said, unless you genuinely don't understand, in which case, philosophy really is not your thing, not like any of this is all that hard to follow, perhaps you should take early retirement, no offence, just not sure what else to say. dmb says: We don't conceptualize patterns, you see, because THEY ARE CONCEPTS. DM: Silly boy, if patterns are concepts you have no use for the idea of patterns, patterns do not exist for you, there are only concepts, which humans create, which is pure idealism or SOM without matter, shame really, what are your concepts concepts of or about? nothing? DMB's fantastical nonsense ghosts? Does this use of the word concepts have any meaning. That is more than enough nonsense on stilts for me, but thanks for the echo chamber sounding board, I quite like the idea that pre-conceptual patterns are closer to DQ than SQ, I can make some progress with that idea out in the open air in the big wide world that you can't recognise as existing. You are a funny character, think you hurt my feelings, ha ha, don't worry this is an intellectual business for me, truth is the game, not investment in social standing or personal worth, you should try it, it is the only way to rise above the filth of ego concerns as Nietzsche warned. I thought you could do better , but not yet it seems, but even when the SQ is thick and sticky and sluggish there is always hope that some DQ might shine through and make the change. I'll keep my fingers crossed for you, I like you really, you have talent, but don't waste it evading the obvious, admit the challenge and do some real thinking to tackle it instead, nonsense on stilts is wasting your time and not just mine. 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
