[MD] WHY MoQ IS PARALYzED

[Ham Priday]

Ron --


> The point is that our intellectual thoughts are dictated
> by grammar. When we question the structure of reality
> we question the structure of thought which is the
> structure of grammar. This is the significance.  goD,
> Quality, essence, all of it.
>
> Source is in the infinite now I am immersed in.

Thoughts are intellectualized as concepts, not dictated by grammar.  Putting 
thoughts into words to communicate the concept comes later, if at all.  If 
we're only analyzing verbal propositions, we're not conceptualizing.  An 
idea or concept "invented" by playing with word-symbols doesn't pass the 
test of intuitive reasoning.  Which is why I'm critical of "scrabble-type" 
assertions made without intuitively sound premises to support them.

Take "Source is in the infinite now I am immersed in," for example.  It 
sounds nice, has a poetic lilt to it, but what does it mean?  Can an 
"infinite now" create or produce anything, especially if we are immersed in 
it?   The statement presupposes a concept which you have not explained, so 
it has no meaning for me.  Lyricists and poet-philosophers are fond of such 
euphemisms because they are memorable.  Unfortunately, they fail to express 
the underlying concept, if indeed there is one.

That's also why the public is so cynical about political rhetoric.  Slogans 
like "We need a change in Washington", "It's time to move forward", "We care 
about the working class," all evoke sanguine feelings but, unless they are 
translated into practical solutions, they are meaningless.  Similarly, "Some 
things are better then others" may be a memorable cliché, and vaguely 
suggests moral values, but it is not the kind of premise on which a 
metaphysics can be constructed.

Word associations can be a nemesis for the philosopher, but Philosophy is 
not a word game.  Nothing short of an epiphany can change our perspective of 
reality.  Words and names, however they are configured, will not suffice. 
Not until the new perspective has been fully realized by the author should 
logical analysis and grammatical construction be applied.

If there is no fundamental concept, what's the use of word analysis?  For 
that matter, of what use is philosophy?

Regards,
Ham