David, Rich and Diana,
My concerns with going through the book in chronological order is that the
philosophy builds like layers in an onion. As a result, what he says in
Chapter 13 is not really complete until connected with Chapter XX. We would
need to be careful here.......
As another wild idea.... what if we got some type of outline that could be
applied to any metaphysics or philosophy. You know, the aristotelian type of
categorization that college text books and philosophology books have to
analyze metaphysics?
i.e.
I. Nature of reality
II. Nature of knowledge
III. Nature of Value
With each broken into subsections. DiSanto and Steele do something along
these lines in their "Guidebook to ZAMM". We could dedicate the months to
each section or subsection. Does anybody know of an outline that would
facilitate analyzing and summarizing a metaphysics? (surely you philosophy
majors have something?)
Another suggestion on David's idea is that we need a system not just to
discuss ideas, but to succinctly lay out the issues and agreed concepts. I
recently tried to edit the first two full Lila Squad program topics. Lots of
good material, but it isn't in a form that is usable as a static latch. We
need to end each chapter or topic with a summary of the issues, agreed
interpretations, pending controversies and any alternative explanations or
twists on the theme. This requires an editor and a simple editorial review
process.
Finally, we should be familiar with Glove's work with "Lila's Child". He is
writing an on-line and possibly paper book of early Squad conversations. He
has edited the material down to a fireside-chat type of format that is
logically sorted by categories. Again, he does not attempt 'active'
editorialization though.
Roger
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
