[MD] E/O

[MarshaV]

David,

Thank you very much.  I did get as far as clear definitions, but 
after that much confusion.  Your post has help 
considerable.  Presently, I have one additional question.  Would the 
source of knowledge be exclusively the Intellectual Level, or Social 
& Intellectual Levels (both being of the mind)?   Both seems right 
because there was knowledge before the Intellectual Level evolved, 
but that might reflect my misunderstanding.

Marsha



At 08:05 AM 6/22/2007, you wrote:
>Hi Marsha,
>
>I find it confusing too.  And I've put off looking into it further,
>but now is as good as time as any to look into it. So I tried the
>dictionary, it wasn't any clearer, so I tried the poor mans
>encyclopaedia - Wikipedia. It actually gives both concepts with many
>example questions so I'll answer a select few of them below.
>
>Before I do however, I should mention I don't think there is a single
>question which can divide both concepts like you request as both
>concepts are their own    questions themselves.
>
>
>
>Epistemology:
>=============
>"What do you know?"
>
>That Quality is fundamental and the source of all things. From this
>quality a metaphysics is born called the MOQ.
>
>"How do you know it?"
>
>  From experience.
>
>"What is knowledge?"
>
>Knowledge is static patterns of Intellectual value.
>
>
>Ontology:
>========
>"What is existence?"
>
>static quality capable of apprehending DQ.
>
>"Is existence a property?"
>
>Among other things, yes.
>
>"What does it mean to say something does not exist?"
>
>It means you are not talking empirically. Because some thing is
>static quality and thus it exists.
>
>"Why are we here?"
>
>Because of good.
>
>"Why does anything exist, rather than nothingness?"
>
>Mu. Both anything and nothing exists.
>
>
>It would appear to me Marsha, that epistemology is about the source
>of knowledge.  Thus, the MOQ perspective is that epistemologically,
>quality is the source of Intellectual patterns of value.  Meanwhile,
>ontology is about the source of existence.  The MOQ perspective on
>this is that ontologically quality is the source of everything.
>
>Hope this makes things clearer for you.
>
>Cheers,
>
>David.
>
>On 22/06/2007, at 9:01 PM, MarshaV wrote:
>
> >
> > Greetings,
> >
> > Hmmmm
> >
> > I'm looking for the differences in evaluating the MOQ from a
> > ontological p-o-v versus an epistemological p-o-v.   Maybe with an
> > example of a question that might demonstrate the difference in
> > answers.  I find this confusing.
> >
> > Marsha
> >
> >