[MD] [Bulk] Re: Rorty's Relativism

[skutvik at online.no]

Hail to you Marsha.

19 Aug. you wrote:

> Hello Bo,
> And RMP having pulled us to a new level explains that Quality(Dynamic
> and static) is the measure of all things.  This then becomes not a
> regress back to the thinking of the early sophists, and not being
> stuck in the s/o confusion, but a big leap forward to Quality which
> includes the s/o intellectual patterns beneath it as a set of tools. 
> Quality is the measure of all things, and that still makes it a form
> of relativism.  

I agree, only that IMO the Sophists were (what was to the become) the  
"S" part of the S/O aggregate. The Truth-ists were clearly what 
became "the objectivists" and the there-is-no-truth-except-what-we-
agree-upon would become "the subjectivists". These two as 
existence's fundamental fault is what the MOQ substitutes with its 
DQ/SQ "fault" (I know you go for the Quality as whole and it is whole in 
the sense that both DQ and SQ are Quality.    

> I also still agree with you that it would be proper for the
> Dynamic/static (the MoQ) point-of-view to reign on its own level.  

Not as a static level but as the meta-level that it actually is supposed to 
be.

You added:

> Do you think I've gone too far, or not far enough?  Actually, I think it
> feels just right, yet I've felt that way before but ended up shifting
> still further.  Reality, on the move...   

You have reached the summit. Good to have company up here..Now 
we can go down to the SOM or intellectual level and help those stuck 
there ;-). 

Bodvar