Quoting Kevin Perez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> You appear to be subordinating the "seeing process" to the MOQ.  This kills 
> it,
> imo.
> Better to say the MOQ points to the "seeing process," again, imo.
>  
> > The more I think about it, the more I become convinced that the MOQ 
> > provides a bridge over paradoxes, recursions, self-contradictions and 
> > loops because it rises above and looks down at  intellectual level. But, I 
> > could be wrong.
>  
> I can understand how one would see it this way if one sees the MOQ as 
> something
> that embodies the "seeing process."  Backwards, imo.

Hi Kevin,

You may be right, but I can't separate the MOQ from it's heart and soul, namely
direct experience/valuation, i.e., Penrose's "seeing" metaphor. Otherwise, the 
MOQ
is just another SOM metaphysics, pointing from itself (subjective) to otherness
(objective). 

Platt



-------------------------------------------------
This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/
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/

Reply via email to