From: SQUONKSTAIL@aol.com
Date: Wed Aug 20 2003 - 20:28:33 BST
Squonk,
You have a really strange way of "sincerely wanting to help" if the only way
you reply to someone's questions, arguments, or ideas is just to repeat your
slogans. Forget it.
- Scott
Scott,
I have begun to consider the possibility that you have not in fact read
either Zen and the art of motorcycle maintenance or Lila.
If you have read these books you will know the Metaphysics of Quality
explains why it is we may feel subjects and objects are primary, but better explained
as patterns of value.
Stating this position is not sloganeering surely?
If i state Descartes' position is such that mind is unexpended substance, am
i sloganeering or expounding Descartes' metaphysics?
I sent you a quote from ZMM which i can remind you of:
But we know from Phaedrus' metaphysics that the harmony Poincare talked about
is not subjective. It is the source of subjects and objects and exists in an
anterior relationship to them. It is not capricious, it is the force that
opposes capriciousness; the ordering principle of all scientific and mathematical
thought which destroys capriciousness, and without which no scientific thought
can proceed. What brought tears of recognition to my eyes was the discovery
that these unfinished edges match perfectly in a kind of harmony that both
Phaedrus and Poincare had talked about, to produce a complete structure of thought
capable of uniting the separate languages of science and art into one. ZMM.
p. 271.
The MoQ takes the anterior harmony to be a relationship between SQ and DQ.
The ordering principle is harmonious or coherent relationships between SQ and
DQ. There are no subjects and objects in this metaphysics and therefore i do not
discuss them. Why should i?
There was a time, a time forever gone, when i was fooled into taking subjects
and objects seriously, but the MoQ has been chipping away at my old view for
10+ years now. In fact, my earlier understanding of quantum physics was doing
that before i read Lila.
You, on the other hand, are dominated by intellectual patterns which cannot
ignore subjects and objects. I understand that, and do not blame your for it.
But please do not cast aspersions regarding my sincere wish to help you see
things the MoQ way? You do not have to agree, but please understand that i have
gone to some length to avoid dismissing you, only to discover that you are now
dismissing me.
If you want me to forget it i will.
All the best,
squonk
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 : Wed Aug 20 2003 - 20:31:04 BST