Greetings All
It's 3 days before the end of the month and time to start voting on the topic suggestions for
next month. You should vote between now and 30-June-2001 inclusive. To cast your vote,
please reply to this message stating the number of your choice from the suggestions listed
below. Your vote will not appear until all votes are in and the new topic is announced on 1-
July-2001.
#1
THEM PESKY INJUNS
The conjecture that Indians had some huge influence on American thought is never
supported well.
(The last in the series of topics from January)
#2
The statement made by Phaedrus of ZAMM (Chp.19) that Quality does not reside in the
material world is readily accepted, but the rest of it - that it doesn't reside in the mind -
seems more obscure. What does it mean that Quality is not of mind?
#3
What exactly is the solution to the subject-object schisma given by MOQ ?
We know that MOQ replaces the object-subject split with a static-dynamic split, but for
example the mind-matter relation is not clear (as turned out last months discussion). If MOQ
goes beyond SOM then it should be possible to describe SOM in terms of MOQ and thus
clearifying typical SOM problems.
I propose the folowing problems:
- Describe 'object' in terms of MOQ; which are its static parts, and which are its dynamic
parts ?
- Describe 'subject' in terms of MOQ; which are its static parts, and which are its dynamic
parts ?
- Describe the relation between subject and object in terms of MOQ, and show why the
object-subject split is denied by MOQ.
Horse
------- End of forwarded message -------
MOQ.org - http://www.moq.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:03:31 BST