[MD] Fwd: irony and socrates

[Marsha]

Sent from my iPhone

Begin forwarded message:

> From: "MarshaV" <valkyr at att.net>
> Date: October 12, 2009 1:51:48 PM EDT
> To: <valkyr at att.net>
> Subject: RE: [MD] irony and socrates
>

>
>
>
>
> Ron, please note that my "So?" reply was to your statement: "you are  
> the
> only one treating them that way" and not an indication that I didn't  
> care
> and wanted to end further discussion.  I think your reinterpretation  
> was
> dishonest.
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org
> [mailto:moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org] On Behalf Of Marsha
> Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 11:30 AM
> To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
> Subject: Re: [MD] irony and socrates
>
>
> So?
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Oct 12, 2009, at 11:06 AM, X Acto <xacto at rocketmail.com> wrote:
>
>> you are the only one treating them that way
>
>
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----
>> From: Marsha <valkyr at att.net>
>> To: MoQ <moq_discuss at moqtalk.org>
>> Sent: Mon, October 12, 2009 10:50:51 AM
>> Subject: Re: [MD] irony and socrates
>>
>>
>> Steve,
>>
>> Love, good, and infinity can be objectified and manipulated; that is
>> exactly what you did in your paragraphs below.
>>
>> The Intellect Level is comprised of patterns that represent the
>> process of objectfying and manipulating abstract symbols:
>> "Objectificationt is the process by which abstract concepts are
>> treated as of they were concrete things or physical objects.  In this
>> sense the term is synonym to reification."
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objectification
>>
>>
>> Marsha
>>
>>
>>> ------
>>>
>>> Hi Marsha,
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 8:36 AM, Marsha <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> If the question is whether the patterns in the Intellectual Level
>>>> are
>>>> subject/object in nature, I still agree with you Bo.
>>>>
>>>> Marsha
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm not sure what you could mean when you say this. If your point is
>>> that all patterns can be thought of as either subjects or objects,
>>> even if I grant that that is true (which I don't since I think
>>> concepts like good and love and infinity and experience among others
>>> will give us trouble here), that still leaves the question of  
>>> whether
>>> they are *best* thought of that way. Also, the habit of mind of
>>> distinguishing between subjects and objects is just one among a
>>> multitude of intellectual patterns such as preferring simpler over
>>> more complicated explanations (when all else is equal) and  
>>> preferring
>>> explanations that describe a wide range of experience over ones  
>>> which
>>> describe only a particular narrow set of experiences and preferring
>>> explanations that cohere with other explanations that we have  
>>> already
>>> selected.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Steve
>
>
>
>
>