[MD] E/O and can Joseph Margolis help us

[David M]

Hi all

Been investigatin Joseph Margolis a bit, looks like a fellow traveller
from what it says on WIki:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Margolis

Has he been brought up before, can't remember?

Our suggestions about DQ, place it as the ultimate
ontological referent, but as Margolis explores, this is
a radically different conception from ontologies that are
looking for some kind of certainty, essence, substance 
that can eliminate change.

Regards
David M


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David Harding" <davidjharding at gmail.com>
To: <moq_discuss at moqtalk.org>
Sent: Friday, June 22, 2007 1:05 PM
Subject: Re: [MD] E/O


> 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
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> moq_discuss mailing list
>> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
>> Archives:
>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
>> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
> 
> moq_discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>