[MD] SOLAQI, Kant's TITs, chaos, and the S/I distinction

[Squonkonguitar at aol.com]

Hi Laird and Case,
Skutvik's ideas show a man who has an imagination and he can't be knocked  
for that.
But the SOLAQI has a basic flaw Skutvik did not wish to contemplate.
 
Skutvik's assertion is: The subject/object distinction is fundamental  to 
intellectual patterns.
It is very important to keep this central to ones analysis of Skutvik's  
position.
 
However, the s/o distinction is a particular type of a more fundamental  
distinction which may be described as static differentiation's.
 
There exist differentiation's at the social level and the intellectual  level 
simply evolves these differentiation's in a more complex and abstract  
process.
 
It may be observed that such processes are not reliant upon the s/o  
distinction, but are reliant however upon static differentiation's.
 
This is a very simple argument and is consistent with the moq even though  it 
is not explicitly presented in Lila or McWatt's 'critical' analysis.
 
Now, if we read static differentiation's back into the SOLAQI then it may  be 
observed that the s/o distinction already existed before intellectual  
patterns; social authority relies upon the celebrity leader being differentiated  
from those who follow, for example.
 
Love,
Mark