[MD] Wanted: A proper foundation

[X Acto]

[Bo]:
> SOM (minus "M") is the highest static value so you will not be
> accused (by me at least) for operating from that level's premises,
> it's only when you take its S/O distinction to be reality's ultimate
> ground you are lost.

Ham:
You misquote me.  I never said S/O is the ultimate ground of reality.  I said that existence is a dichotomy--a duality, if you will--and an ontology divided cannot stand as the primary (ultimate) source.  Value may be understood to stand between the contingencies of the dichotomy, connecting man with (his and) its essential source.  But Value requires a sensible agent to be realized, and so we're back to the dualism again.  Hierarchies, levels, and patterns, no matter how "dynamic" the metaphor used to describe them, do not "overcome" difference.  And existence is a differentiated system.

Ron:
For someone who really doesn't seem to accept an ontology that rejects ontology you
have a great grasp at whats at stake, but where do you derrive the notion of an ultimate 
source, if not via rationality? O' Parmenides! no matter the metaphor used to describe
anything  it does not overcome anything either, wether source nor difference..