[MD] The Quality/MOQ meta-metaphysics

[skutvik at online.no]

John, All. 

22 June you wrote and wrote and wrote and I answered, answered 
...etc but I got the sinking  Ron Kulp feeling that we are on
different planets, you will never understand or be satisfied so I
deleted it all just leaving this last bit:  

John:
> Ok.  Maybe I'm wrong.  Maybe you're real flexible in your thinking. 
> I admit I skim sometimes because it does seem to me that you just
> keep repeating the same incomprehensible formulations. 

Quantum Mech. is completely and utterly incomprehensible from 
"normal" premises. There once was a "weak interpretation" that 
insisted that it had to be comprehensible (Einstein was the 
representantive here) but I believe the strong interpretation is
dominant now after the Einstein-Rosen-Podolsky thought experiment
(made possible in the eighties) was disproved. Yet, in spite of its
incomprehensibility the Quantum predictions are infallible. I think we
have a similar situation regarding the MOQ with a weak and strong
interpretation. You - the weak interpreters - insist that it must be
"comprehensible", while the strong (SOL) interpreters don't care if it
understood from SOM - it CAN'T be - but simply apply it and the strong
(SOL) MOQ's delivers infallible results while the weak MOQ is good for
nothing.

Bodvar.