Matt: But if there are other reasons to suggest a divine mind, then I leave that up to the poet inclined to do so.
Mark: Hi Matt, Something occurred to me: 1. I asked if a divine mind could hold all values? 2. You suggested that Pragmatism (the mind is a tool for dealing with a world which thrusts itself upon us) stops Idealism. 3. In order for the tool under evaluation to work it must: a. Compile a repertoire of behaviour (inductively at first) b. Develop the skill of anticipation and problem solving (deductively and further by induction) 4. The statement, '...if there are other reasons to suggest a divine mind, then I leave that up to...' indicates you are satisfied with: c. Your repertoire d. Your skills (i.e. static) 5. The best Pragmatists are open to Dynamic changes and open to anticipation and problem solving. 6. Therefore, the best Pragmatists are Dynamic. 7. You have indicated you are static. 8. Therefore, you are not open to anticipation and problem solving - you are not a good Pragmatist even though you advocate it. 9. My question was asked from the position of a Dynamic Pragmatist (anticipate new developments and applying potential solutions as one who fully accepts the moq, yet is capable of asking questions the moq may yet be presented with in a world which may thrust the unknown upon us). 10. If you are a Dynamic Pragmatist you should therefore qualify, "I'm not too hip to the idea of a "divine mind," mainly because pragmatically it doesn't do much for you" with, "...as far as i know." 11. It would be problematic to qualify all statements this way. 12. But one may avoid reinforcing the opposite tendency with ones own habitual use of emphatic language. Pragmatically, it doesn't do much for you or your Motorcycle. Love, Mark 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.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
