[MD] MOQ levels

[Ham Priday]

DMB, Steve, all --


Concerning a synopsis of my philosophy, dmb said (in part):


> I think this represents a substantial conflict with the MOQ.
> Ham's insistence on the importance of the "observing subject",
> the "cognizant subject", the "body of this subject", consciousness,
> "the individual's intellect" etc. looks exactly like SOM to me.
> It amounts to a re-assertion of the Cartesian self, which is
> described in Lila as a ridiculous fiction. For James, it is one
> of the most troublesome fictions in all of philosophy.
> For the Pragmatists in general it is a reified abstraction,
> an idea that mistakes itself for an existential reality.
> It's a hard idea to get used to. It scares people.
> And if a guy's philosophy is centered around it, then it's
> even harder. I don't know that I could explain it any better
> than Steve did, but I'd emphasize the fact that switching from
> SOM to the MOQ will necessarily involve a fairly serious
> re-conceptualization of the self. ...It is both emotionally
> and conceptually difficult to let it go or trade it in.

Thanks for giving me the benefit of your critique, David.  I think you're 
wrong about James, but probably right about pragmatists (and nihilists) in 
general.  In any case, Essentialism is my philosophic platform.  I can 
assure you that I do not intend to "let it go" or "trade it in" by switching 
to a belief system that is devoid of selfness.

--Ham