David M to Horse:
I am OK to drop pre-conceptual and replace it with pre-cultural SQ, and
cultural-SQ, so that all SQ is conceptual but the distinction I have
pointed out is seen as valid, could make the split biological SQ versus
intellectual SQ. So I would see biological SQ as having evolved
naturally, is more given, is less open to change, and intellectual SQ as
more open and can change and develop culturally. Would you agree?
Andre:
No David. You're way off the mark.
'It wasn't any particular esthtician who produced this reaction in him.
It was all of them. It wasn't any particular point of view that outraged
him so much as the idea that Quality should be subordinated to /any/
point of view. The intellectual process was forcing Quality into its
servitude, prostituting it. I think that was the source of his
anger'(ZMM, p 207).
I get the distinct feeling that you fully realize what you are doing
David, and you are doing it for ego-tripping, self-centered reasons,
whatever these are.
Bloody hell: pre-cultural sq?...cultural sq Biological sq and
pre-biological sq?? Inorganic sq and pre-inorganic sq??? DQ and pre-DQ????
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
