[MD] What is SOM?

[Ian Glendinning]

Blimey, I agree with Platt again ... "We think we're in SOM whenever
we think. But we're actually in MOQ all the time."

That's a neat way to put the problem we have arguing to anything like
conclusions, because our thought and talk is (mostly) hidebound by our
SOMist heritage. Even those of us that just "know" we are MoQists, can
help tripping up over the SOMism in our arguments, thought or
expressed. (Is this the "Ker-Ching", in the Ron / DMB thread ?)

Ian

On 8/8/08, MarshaV <marshalz at charter.net> wrote:
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Platt Holden" <plattholden at gmail.com>
> To: <moq_discuss at moqtalk.org>
> Sent: Friday, August 08, 2008 8:54 AM
> Subject: Re: [MD] What is SOM?
>
>
> > Mr Gavin Gee-Clough!
> > I asked you a question a few days ago, if I have overlooked your
> > reply please direct me to it. The said question was this:
> >
> > On 31 July you wrote to Krimel:
> >
> > > gav: if you are talking of S and O (as primary; and you are), then
> > > we are in SOM. yep that old familiar terrain where objects are
> > > objects and subjects are subjects and never the twain shall mingle.
> >
> > Agree, but where are we when we are in SOM? That's the
> > #¤&%¤# question. Not in another metaphysical universe, because
> > the MOQ is supposed to have subsumed SOM. At an evil pattern
> > that has hijacked an otherwise neutral intellect, or smack in the
> > middle of the 4th. level itself?
> >
> > If anyone else has an opinion, please ...
> >
>
> We think we're in SOM whenever we think. But we're actually in MOQ all the
> time.
>
> Just my 2 cents worth.
>
> Regards,
> Platt
>
>
>
>
> Oh yes Platt, this is great!
>
> - 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/
>