[MD] What is SOM?

[Ron Kulp]

DMB had said:

    I'm talking about SOM and essentialism. These are not 
    identical. SOM is a kind of essentialism, but there are other 
    kinds, although the former is usually a subset of the latter. I 
    say "usually" because the MOQ retains SOM in a non- 
    essentialist way.   

Bo;
and I believe he says the same as me, particularly about the MOQ 
retaining SOM in a non-essential way. 

Ron:
and as I have said I agree with you within that certain context.
  
Ron prev:
>  I've tried to explained this to Bo that SOL is remaking MoQ into
> another form of, and what you rightly point out as, what amounts to
> essentialism.

Bo:
As suspected, you never understood the SOL which says that the 
S/O distinction is MOQ's intellectual level, thus essentialism is only 
part of its 4th. level, not of the MOQ that has a totally different 
metaphysical slash. Thus the S/O is retained (as DMB says) in a 
non-essentialist way. Get it?  

Ron:
oh I get it, it's the fact that you insist that intellect as a general
universal human condition is defined by s/o, and propose a cultural
intellectual elitism by this assertion. That's my problem, it's this
sort of
intellectual bigotry that I take offence to, not so much the standard
racial garbage.
   

Ron ctd:
> Because Bo equates ontology with intellect, he sees MoQ as an
> evolutionary step intellectually. Which calls the whole level system
> into question and all the fuss about a 5th level and all sorts of
> explanations to accommodate it. 


Bo:
I don't equate ontology with the 4th. level as such. The 
phenomenal/ontological (seeming/real) pair is a SOM variety and 
as such part of the  4th. level's repertoire. 

Ron:
you might as well, it fits right in.

Bo:
"Fuss about about a 5th level". I simply claim that the MOQ is the 
metaphysics that has intellect as a subset, consequently it can't be 
an intellectual pattern. This makes the MOQ a "meta-level". Try 
logic for a change.    

Ron:
I did try that logic and came to the conclusion that it is faulty
and re-establishes all the essentialist notions within it.
It simply solves by redefinition. Which doesn't change anything.










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/