From: Erin Noonan (enoonan@kent.edu)
Date: Fri Oct 04 2002 - 18:48:14 BST
SCOTT: I see three reasons not to use a different word. The first is, as Steve
>says, the old words have an old value that has been wiped out by the
>combined efforts of fundamentalists and secularists. To recover this old
>value is to both recover and make them new.
**good point
>The second is that there are no different words, or at least I can't
>think of any.
***details, details (kidding)
>
>The third is political. Philosophy is all about redefining really basic
>words, like "reality". That's what the MOQ is trying to do, for example.
> This has social effects.
>
>- Scott
>
i think these are good points but I still have this issue if i want to
distinguish between the two definitions.....
i can't say "that's faith not faith"
erin
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
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 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 10:37:52 GMT