[MD] Logos is not ergon

[Joseph Maurer]

Hey Ron,
On 9/19/09 3:03 PM, "John Carl" <ridgecoyote at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hey Joe,
> 
> On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 12:44 PM, Joseph Maurer <jhmau at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> 
>> Hi John and all,
>> 
>> You use words in a strange way.
> 
> 
> 
> yeah Joe?  I can definitely see how you would say that.


There is no doubt that your dismissive tone is combative.  I should know a
bit about combative since I was raised in a family of 14 kids.

 
>> Imho DQ remains undefined, so it cannot be
>> quantified bigger than its parts.
> 
> 
> 
> imho, DQ is undefined *only* symbolically.  It is definitely defined
> experientially.  It is definitely defined by definition.
> 
> And you are write.  I do youse words in a strange way.
> 
> But I hope to heavens the meaning of my words comes across somehow because I
> think you make a grave mistake if you confine reality to definition.

"It (DQ) is definitely defined by definition" does not seem possible since
it would no longer be DQ, but merely a symbol of convenience.  If there is
no logic possible what are we doing writing to each other?  Logic is
certainly confined in definition!  but experience??????? The sense of what
you read is your sense, not mine!

> 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/