[MD] What is SOM?

[skutvik at online.no]

Ron 

14 Aug. u wrote:


Bo before:
> > "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. 
 
> Let me add that I did make a well thought out logical argument with
> references and support as to why I feel this is so and all you could
> come up with is petty insults and P.T. Barnum rhetoric. which amounted
> to "nuh-uh" so why don't you take some of your own advice and try
> logic for a change, I mean real analytics, not some half baked
> un-researched line of elitist bullshit that you try to pass off as
> "logic". 

You have now had three attempts at this (my) paragraph and you 
only manage to work yourself up without addressing the issue. 
Your alleged "logical argument" (that would disprove that the 4th. 
level is a subset of the MOQ and can by no twist of logic "contain" 
the MOQ) I haven't seen because it's untenable.  

I know only too well what prevents you to understand the MOQ, 
namely the mile high stumbling stone of "the intellectual level as 
mind" - as mental activity - and consequently that all theorizing, 
thinking, reasoning ...etc. take place in "intellect". What evades 
you is that this logic jumps from the MOQ to SOM in the middle.

The most hilarious aspect of this is that "intellect" - even in SOM -
is the S/O distinction (dictionarywise) Again and again one finds 
that intellect is presented as opposed to EMOTION and people 
actually "think" - form argument, and express them - motivated by 
emotions (while at the social level) and that that one may THINK 
after having transcended intellect SOM.   

Bo