[MD] Academy

[Ron Kulp]

Ian:
Ron, SA, (Bo) that's where you're being a too hard on Bo, but if Bo
isn't coming back to my point, not sure what I can do to help.

Yes the core of any metaphysics is axiomatic, and any choice of
direction of ontological splitting, is just that a "deemed" choice.
There cannot be any fundamental / defintive statement of why any one
choice is better ... other than it works for as much of the
experienced world as possible with minimum inconsistency and maximum
completeness - of course nothing can be entirely complete AND
consistent - so yet more choice about what is "best". Do we really
need anyone to tell us these things ? Bo can't because no-one can,
no-one should be expected to.

The second aspect of debating with Bo whether the Intellectual (and
social layers) are just a version of objectivism / SOMism is really
just an evolving linguistic problem - ie what's in a name historically
... where I've parted company with Bo before ... but not really a big
deal from my perspective.

Ron:
Hello Ian, thanks for trying to mediate, I'm not bashing Bo, I just wish

He'd put his money where his mouth is. The interesting thing about the
MoQ
Is that it really does not rely on a basic principle that is assumed to
be true without proof. Which is what an axiom is. It places proof in
experience
it is verifiable.