DMB responded to Matt,
My remarks were aimed at Ian. I think your comments about trust are
quite sensible, actually. Ian seemed to be overlooking an important
point. As you put it, if one has already decided that it is
appropriate, the evasive, weasel-wordy behavior has already destroyed
the
On Jul 31, 2011, at 1:56 AM, Ham Priday wrote:
Dear Marsha --
Greetings Ham,
I am unsure how to understand the portion of the post addressed to me.
For me, the MoQ is Quality(unpatterned experience/patterned experience).
Static quality represents the conventional; patterns are
Michael responded to Matt, (after Matt had drawn attention to the
warlike nature of MoQ.Discuss debate in the introduction for
newcomers).
I fear that tunnel vision in the fog of war may have settled in.
Me too. The reason I have entered into this thread initiated by
Steve's angry post.
Ian
More good stuff Matt, I hope people are reading you carefully ...
This sums it up for me ...
... people don't like being accused of dishonesty. It's hard for a
conversation to recover from that. The implied context I was thinking
of was the MD, and as an on-going discussion, I'm thinking of
I still think the best understanding of REALITY is found in Lila's words:
...I'm whatever your questions turn me into. You don't see that. It's your
questions that make me who I am. If you think I'm an angel then that's what I
am. If you think I'm a whore then that's what I am. I'm whatever
Hi all,
Just back from the beach and catching up...
On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 9:58 AM, david buchanan dmbucha...@hotmail.com wrote:
Marsha asked four questions:
Have you dropped the words 'free-will' and 'determinism'? If you think
within the MoQ that free-will and determinism have new
MRB,
On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 10:37 PM, Michael R. Brown m...@fuguewriter.com wrote:
Hi, Matt Kundert -
I'll enjoy reading through your recommended writings in a bit.
There's no irony whatsoever. Modern misuse of the term. You mean
inconsistency, and there's not: I'm, just as you said, from
dmb says:
To say that accusations cause mistrust is a little like saying that arrests
cause crime. I mean, if the accusation is not unfounded, then it is the
straw-man maker that has destroyed trust. It's not accusations of evasion
that causes mistrust, it's the evasive weasel-wordy
Beautiful!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NqVE9qfg7yI
Grr
___
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/
On Jul 31, 2011, at 8:10 AM, Steven Peterson wrote:
Hi all,
Just back from the beach and catching up...
On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 9:58 AM, david buchanan dmbucha...@hotmail.com
wrote:
Marsha asked four questions:
Have you dropped the words 'free-will' and 'determinism'? If you
DMB said:
...Maybe I'm expecting too much but I do not complain to announce the end of
the discussion but as an effort to get it back on track. It's like a salvage
operation. While it's certainly true that people don't like being accused of
dishonesty, that truth is a function of the fact that
dmb says:
If you deny free will, then by definition you are a determinist. If you then
deny determinism too, then you are simply incoherent. Call me a dick if you
like, but this is a real criticism and you have not answered it, as far as I
can tell.
Steve:
How can you say that I haven't
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 4:16 PM, david buchanan dmbucha...@hotmail.com wrote:
Steve said to Dan:
...The exact quote I was referencing is “To the extent that one’s behavior is
controlled by static patterns of quality it is without choice. But to the
extent that one follows Dynamic Quality,
We have managed to combine the worst of capitalism and socialism. In
France in the 1980s, the socialists took over the banks. In the US in
the 2000s, the banks took over the government. This is surreal.
-Taleb
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/5d5aa24e-23a4-11de-996a-00144feabdc0.html#ixzz1ThGUex9H
Steve said:
Where I disagree with dmb is in that I think the MOQ reformulation of the
question of freedom DOES significantly alter the basic definitions of free will
and determinism. The MOQ rejects both horns of the traditional dilemma and
reformulates the problem in a way that is
Steve:
Why use a term when you can be nearly guaranteed to be misunderstood
when you use it? Who outside of the handful of people participating in
this forum would think you were defending the capacity to respond to
dynamic quality when you say people have free will? How is that
shorthand
In Sophist by Plato the visitor from Elea seems to make similar assertions
about the Sophist as RMP makes against modern academia. The visitor asserts
to Theatus that the sophist reify concepts and sell them as the experiences they
represent he also criticizes their use of rhetoric as rationalized
Hi, Michael R. Brown,
I think I have to differ with you on that particular use of the term
irony (of which history has thrown up many uses, and as a budding
literary critic, I have some professional horses in the game). The
inconsistency you performed (or, at least, I saw as being performed)
Steve said to Dan:
...Instead of arguing whether or not Pirsig's statement is a middle ground
between free will and determinism [dmb] or better viewed as a rejection of both
horns of the traditional SOM free will/determinism dilemma in favor of a whole
new reformulation of the question of
Ron,
http://www.answers.com/topic/weasel-word
Marsha
On Jul 31, 2011, at 1:37 PM, X Acto wrote:
if you cant
respond in a relevent way to the post.
take your DMB hate some place else
I don't remember you or Steve mentioning anything about
the terms or meanings in a
As I understand it, irony was originally a literary term wherein the actual
meaning turns out to the be opposite of the apparent meaning. It's a kind of
twist or reversal like the kind you see in the myth of Oedipus. This meaning of
the term is then extended more broadly so that it refers to
Steve said:
Why use a term when you can be nearly guaranteed to be misunderstood when you
use it? Who outside of the handful of people participating in this forum would
think you were defending the capacity to respond to dynamic quality when you
say people have free will? How is that shorthand
Ron:
The sophists as rationalists? That's hard to believe. Plato is considered to be
the father of rationalism. You seem to be claiming the opposite of what Pirsig
said and I never ran into anyone who disagreed with him. I'm skeptical ... but
I am also quite curious. Could you dish up some
Marsha said:
Protagoras: “Man is the measure of all things.”, or as Lila might have
interpreted it ‘All beliefs are true if you believe them.’
dmb says:
Marsha think all beliefs are true if you believe them, and yet she has no idea
why anyone would call her a relativist or why anyone
On Jul 31, 2011, at 5:15 PM, david buchanan wrote:
Marsha said:
Protagoras: “Man is the measure of all things.”, or as Lila might have
interpreted it ‘All beliefs are true if you believe them.’
dmb says:
Marsha think all beliefs are true if you believe them, and yet she has no
On Jul 31, 2011, at 5:42 PM, MarshaV wrote:
On Jul 31, 2011, at 5:15 PM, david buchanan wrote:
Marsha said:
Protagoras: “Man is the measure of all things.”, or as Lila might have
interpreted it ‘All beliefs are true if you believe them.’
dmb says:
Marsha think all beliefs
Hi Ham and All,
In S/O metaphysics existence is divided into REAL EXISTENCE and INTENTIONAL
EXISTENCE. Such a division depends upon the intervention of a CREATOR of
infinite capabilities, in order to verify the infinite and finite existence
of the logic of religion. DQ/SQ is a more logical
Hello everyone
On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 10:02 AM, david buchanan dmbucha...@hotmail.com wrote:
Dan said to dmb:
I think that is so cool. Really. I am proud to know a guy like you, Dave. Not
that we really know each other, being as we never actually met... but I feel
we do know each other in
On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 4:45 PM, david buchanan dmbucha...@hotmail.com wrote:
Steve said:
Why use a term when you can be nearly guaranteed to be misunderstood when you
use it? Who outside of the handful of people participating in this forum
would think you were defending the capacity to
On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 1:37 PM, X Acto xa...@rocketmail.com wrote:
... Steve claims that it is a meaningless topic of discussion, similar
to locke.
Yet the fact remains it is a relevent topic of discussion regardless.
Especially
when we are speaking about a moral Philosophy it remains a
DMB said:
(In my experience, accusations boil the blood only to the extent that
they're true - so much so that wild, implausible accusations will only
amuse the accused.)
Matt:
That might be the nub assumption we differ on. In my experience,
accusations will boil the blood of a much larger
Since we're all political lately, here's a pastiche of some of my recent
thoughts on the spending/debt/unfunded liabilities issues.
First, here's what I got from a few minutes of math. (I'll write trillions
as 1,000s of billions to keep it clear.)
The total U.S. federal debt is $14,293
Hi, Matt Kundert -
I'll go with good old Wikipedia's first usage: Irony (from the Ancient Greek
εἰρωνεία eirōneía, meaning dissimulation or feigned ignorance).
As a traditional prescriptivist regarding the backbone of language, I don't
go with the trendy second meaning.
MRB
Steve:
We agree that in the MOQ our behavior is free to some extent and not free to
some extent, but what does this mean? If reality is Quality, then I wonder
Free from what? Controlled by what? I think Pirsig's reformulation cashes
out to, as Matt said months ago, when you be static,
On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 9:58 PM, Michael R. Brown m...@fuguewriter.com wrote:
Hi, Matt Kundert -
I'll go with good old Wikipedia's first usage: Irony (from the Ancient Greek
εἰρωνεία eirōneía, meaning dissimulation or feigned ignorance).
As a traditional prescriptivist regarding the backbone
On Sun, 7/31/11 at 6:47 PM, Joseph Maurer jh...@comcast.net wrote:
Hi Ham and All,
In S/O metaphysics existence is divided into REAL
EXISTENCE and INTENTIONAL EXISTENCE.
Such a division depends upon the intervention of a CREATOR
of infinite capabilities, in order to verify the infinite and
36 matches
Mail list logo
