[MD] Reading & Comprehension

[skutvik at online.no]

Hi Platt.

2 June:

[Krimel] had said:
> Reality ultimately defies description. This is not a some flaky
> mystical quasi-philosophical gobbledy gook. It conforms to our
> everyday experience. Reality is in flux and whatever we say it at a
> particular instant is neither what it was in the previous instant not
> what it will be in the next. We create conceptual patterns to help us
> navigate this flux and those patterns are concepts. Any description
> one offers comes in the form of conceptual patterns. Those patterns
> are not reality but descriptions of it. Bohr said it very well when he
> claimed that physics is not about reality but about what we can say
> about reality. 

Platt comments:
> What fun! Krimel says reality defies description then proceeds to
> describe it. Welcome back, Krimel.

Right. To equalize language with definition is futile, the MOQ says that 
DQ is indefinable - flux if one prefers - and that ought to be fluxy 
enough. To consider this statement as "non-flux" and feel the need for 
the even fluxier Quality of which the DQ/SQ is just one possible non-
fluxy form of is - by the same token - another violation of the flux and 
requires another ... and another ... and another in an infinite regress. 
The hope that the mystical ONE will keep its purity if we just don't 
speak about it is vanity.  I had hoped that this Krimel - coming down 
like omniscience itself - would see this snag that has haunted the 
MOQ for so long, but till now he has repeated the  (James-Buchanan) 
nonsense with language - concepts - as the great sinner. I have 
pressed him to see. Well, we'll see. 

Bodvar