[MD] in defence of the "relative"

[MarshaV]

-----Original Message-----
From: moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org
[mailto:moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org] On Behalf Of Steven Peterson
Sent: Wednesday, November 11, 2009 1:16 PM
To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
Subject: Re: [MD] in defence of the "relative"

> Steve:
> Fine, but this isn't what anyone but you means by the term "relativism."
>
> Marsha:
> I'm a relativist, naturally then the meaning would be relative to the
> context of my patterns of value.

Steve:
Are your patterns not relative to anyone else's patterns? 

Marsha:
I imagine there is some cultural overlap.  

Steve:
If not, I wonder what value you find in telling others that 
you are a relativist. What meaning do you think others will 
take from your claim?

Marsha:
WTF should I care?  This is a website to explore MoQ related ideas.  


Marsha:
> I would like to know what _everyone_ but me means by the term
> "relativism"???  Then tell me _how you know_ what _everyone_ but me knows,
> since knowing is a private affair???

Steve:
If knowing is a private affair, I suppose that it is independent (not
relative) to what anyone else knows?

Marsha:
To me knowing is relative to a static patterns of value and Dynamic Quality.



Steve:
It would now seem that "solipsism" would be a more accurate term.

Marsha:
Maybe it seems like "solipsism" to your understanding?  That doesn't mean it
is "solipsism" to everyone's understanding.   

By the way, where is the answer to this previously asked question:  "I would
like to know what _everyone_ but me means by the term "relativism"???"
Where is the definition that everyone but me knows as relativism???  


Marsha