From: Simon Magson (twix_570@hotmail.com)
Date: Sat Nov 20 2004 - 12:16:59 GMT
Scott Roberts wrote:
>[Scott:] There is SQ involved whenever there is DQ involved, which is to
>say, always. DQ without SQ is meaningless. That's why I say that the model
>we have that best shows DQ/SQ interaction is intellect. "Just value" is
>meaningless. It has to be in reference to some state of affairs.
The whole point - the single most important statement - of the MOQ is that
"just value" is NOT meaningless. His answer to the dilemma given him at
Bozeman was that Quality is independent of, and without any necessary
reference to, both subject and object - he says that it is quite the
opposite and that subjects and objects are only experienced with reference
to value. So, to correct your statement above, it is more that your "state
of affairs" has to be in reference to value.
This indicates a glaring misreading/misunderstanding/dismissal on your part.
SM
_________________________________________________________________
It's fast, it's easy and it's free. Get MSN Messenger today!
http://www.msn.co.uk/messenger
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 20 2004 - 12:29:37 GMT