[MD] Knowledge as MOQ's intellect

[David M]

Hi Bo

>> SOM is the form intellect has developed from and with. The S-O
>> distinction intellectually divides experience-reality into two.

DM: The S-O helps to create the 4th level but I see no reason why the
4th level cannot evolve, broaded away from SOM and yet remain
something we can call intellectual.

>
> "SOM the form intellect developed from". It sounds as if intellect could
> have developed from something else and - in that case - into
> something differnt. Why not simply say "SOM was how intellect
> regarded itself before the MOQ took over and showed us its proper
> place?

DM: Hard to imagine away our own actual evolution.The MOQ does,
I'd accept, change how we see SOM and allows us to drop the M,
otherwise known as anti-essentialism for the likes of Dewey and Heidegger
would say and they are not MOQers.

>
>> and MOQ tries to heal this and avoid the M problems of SOM. There is a
>> danger that MOQ could fall back into SOM as Matt K argues it sometimes
>> does
>
> At times I wonder if it has ever been out of SOM.

DM: True, some of our posters seem a bit confused.

The notion of Quality
> as some all pervading medium that the MOQ is just one possible
> theory about is somish to the core. It's Kant's "Thing in itself" that no
> one - or no theory - will fathom or catch.

DM: I always see quality as experienced quality.

>
>> but with care I think it can tread this difficult path of being a
>> metaphysics without the problems of SOM. But in some ways it changes
>> what we mean by metaphysics. No reality/appearance distinction, no
>> quest for certainty.
>
> THAT is just right
> IMO
> Bo

Good.

Thanks for the debate, I have enjoyed it.
David M