Re: MD On Faith

From: ml (
Date: Mon Oct 25 2004 - 22:09:00 BST

  • Next message: Erin: "Re: MD On Faith"

    Hello Erin,

    ---- Original Message -----
    From: Erin
    Sent: Monday, October 25, 2004 1:57 PM
    Subject: Re: MD On Faith



     There are many "rational" people who think the MOQ is "irrational" and
    nothing you have said seems like it would convince them. I wanted you to
    explain your argument to a skeptic-----slapping a title "rational
    empiricism" I would doubt would convince them.
    Can you explain why it is rational empiricism, please.

    It seems that labeling MoQ as either rational or irrational is
    rather a SOM-ish position. Fine for a philosophy class but
    counter productive for wrapping crenelations of squishy
    brain matter around Quality.

    Static Quality would seem rather more concrete in
    rationality and experience as we often consider
    those attributes manifest-in-being.

    Dynamic Quality would be more "pre-rational" than
    irrational, until it begins to accrete into being from
    manifesting-becoming out of non-being and then
    passes into Static Quality.

    Or to put it another way, comedians can't joke about
    DQ as it is not shared experience the way SQ is.
    Only when we've shared SQ sufficiently can any of
    it take on the stature of banana-skin pratfall verbiage
    in the lexicon of Stephen Wright or others...


    MOQ.ORG -
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 -
    Nov '02 Onward -
    MD Queries -

    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Oct 26 2004 - 00:27:02 BST