[MD] Essentialism and the MOQ

[Ham Priday]

Hey, Laird --


I hate to see you give up on me when we were having such a great time!
Anyway, I have a feeling that we'll be talking again soon, probably on some
other topic.  So, for future reference, let me leave you with this list of
the statements that I think we agree on, and some others that give me
trouble.

Agreed concepts:
> With DQ alone, we can maintain no patterns.
> Value, innumerable, is the whole continuum of possible values.
    [But I see Value (capV) as an absolute rather than a "continuum",
     and we do not experience/sense absolute Value.]
> The totality of my Existence is unique to me.
> What has Value to me can be either desirable or undesirable.
> The "appearance of reality" could not occur without the
    subject/object dichotomy.

Concepts in serious contention:
> "Nothing" would have the greatest possible potentiality.
> Quality is unconditional.
> Existence is the whole of SQ, actualized by DQ.
> I suppose you could call SQ "the 'becoming' of DQ.
   [Awareness is the becoming of Value (SQ/DQ).]
> Conscious awareness is not a condition of the scenario.
> Beingness of existence is primary to its Essence.
> e(E)ssence [equates to] (my Quality).

I also don't know what is meant by "deeper interpretation" in your
statement:
> When words are written in "proper" form (first letter
> capitalized), it implies a deeper interpretation of the
> standard meaning.  That's why I call rational reality
> "existence".

It has been a "fun ride" for me, too, but I think you're right that we've
reached a stalemate in this debate.

Thanks for your clarifying insight, and enjoy your stay in Qualityland.

Essentially yours,
Ham