[MD] in defence of the "relative"

[John Carl]

Interesting question Marsha, thought provoking even.    I'd say that in my
hierarchy of goals, communal unity is my favorite.  To be known and accepted
as part of a community that is growing and dynamic produces the most
excitement and satisfaction in my life.

Goals are defined by scarcity.  If I was hungry, my goal would be to eat
more regularly.  If I was fat, it'd be to lose weight.  So asking what your
top goal is is like asking "what are you lacking?".  So I'll turn the
question back to you, what are *you* lacking, Marsha, that you'd like to
actualize in your life?







On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 8:59 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:

> John,
>
> Okay, but most of the time I'm just processing along...  What are your
> favorite type of goals?
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org
> [mailto:moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org] On Behalf Of John Carl
> Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2009 11:52 AM
> To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
> Subject: Re: [MD] in defence of the "relative"
>
> Marsha,
>
>
> To my mind, method stems from  intention whereas process is something that
> works itself out.
>
> Thus my method is something I do to achieve a goal, whereas my process is
> something external that I join.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 1:20 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>
> >
> > Hi John,
> >
> > Relativism seems a process to me.  In your book what is the difference
> > between process and method?
> >
> >
> > Marsha
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org
> > [mailto:moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org] On Behalf Of John Carl
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2009 12:01 AM
> > To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
> > Subject: Re: [MD] in defence of the "relative"
> >
> > Ummm. Not sure what application the future needs, but I just wanted to
> > clarify that the distinction I made between relativism as an absolute and
> > relativism as a method wasn't actually MY distinction, it was Ron's.  And
> > He'd probably point out it wasn't HIS it came from Protagoras but I'm
> > pretty
> > sure Protogoras stole it from somebody else.
> >
> > The theft continues ever
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 10:17 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > John,
> > >
> > > I meant that you were inferring more in the quotes supporting
> relativism
> > > than were supplied, possibly to discredit the argument, not the normal
> > > inferring necessary for common communication.
> > >
> > > Sure, if you want to present some distinctions between method and
> > > metaphysics, but fist make the presentation of a general sort.  Save
> the
> > > application to relativism for some time in the future.
> > >
> > >
> > > Marsha
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org
> > > [mailto:moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org] On Behalf Of John Carl
> > > Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 12:26 PM
> > > To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
> > > Subject: Re: [MD] in defence of the "relative"
> > >
> > > We all infer more than is stated constantly.  No choice in that.  Don't
> > you
> > > think the distinction between relativism as a method and relativism as
> a
> > > metaphysics is helpful?
> > >
> > > John the scary machinist
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 9:20 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > John,
> > > >
> > > > Your post to Ham spoke of 'total relativism' which sounds typical of
> > > > Plato's
> > > > scarey machinations. And I haven't heard anybody suggesting that
> > > relativism
> > > > should be a new temple.  You are inferring more than was stated.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Marsha
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org
> > > > [mailto:moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org] On Behalf Of John
> Carl
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 12:03 PM
> > > > To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
> > > > Subject: Re: [MD] in defence of the "relative"
> > > >
> > > > Good stuff to discuss Marsha,
> > > >
> > > > "Relativism sees itself, therefore, as breaking a temple or two.
> > Nothing
> > > > > too grand, perhaps, but a way of letting some fresh air into those
> > > closed
> > > > > buildings of the mind.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > "Nothing too grand" as a proper metaphysical ground in and of itself,
> > but
> > > a
> > > > useful method (as Ron posits) for tearing down other's temples.
> > > >
> > > > As a fellow iconoclastic anarchist, I applaud.  But once you set
> > > Relativism
> > > > up as a temple itself, its ripe for knocking down.  As I demonstrate
> in
> > > my
> > > > answer to Ham this morning.
> > > >
> > > > So would you be happy if I offered you a distinction between
> methodical
> > > and
> > > > metaphysical relativism?
> > > >
> > > > Let the play continue!
> > > >
> > > > John the "I'm happy if you're happy"
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Moq_Discuss mailing list
> > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> > Archives:
> > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> > http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
> >
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>