LS Re: Explain the subject-object metaphysics


Magnus Berg (qmgb@bull.se)
Tue, 2 Jun 1998 14:10:56 +0100


Hi Squad

Just wanted to say that I subscribe to Diana's definition
of SOM, including the addition that the assumption is always
implicit.

I also think that the A/NOT A approach is way too general. It
includes every philosophy that can be viewed as a dualism at
some level, and that's most. What's more important, I have a
feeling that whoever states that SOM is A/NOT A, also thinks
that the MoQ is not, i.e. some kind of fuzzy philosophy that
doesn't say much about reality and because of that, doesn't
contain contradictions. The MoQ cut is as rigid as any other,
just different, but I think that's the next subject.

        Magnus

-- 
"I'm so full of what is right, I can't see what is good"
                                N. Peart - Rush



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu May 13 1999 - 16:43:20 CEST