[MD] Thus spoke Lila

[Platt Holden]

Hi Mark,

You're a wise man, Charlie Brown, i.e., Mark, as noted below.:

On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 4:24 PM, 118 <ununoctiums at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> Horses statement (cut) sounds more like a paradox to refute an
> argument.  This was popular amongst the Sophists so he is certainly in
> character for MOQ.  However, by saying something is undefinable one is
> defining it as a category of thing.  We have the definable on one
> side, and the ineffable on the other.
>

Platt
Ah yes, the limits of critical thinking vs."real understanding," as
expressed in . . .

One impulse from a vernal wood
May teach you more of man,
Of moral evil and of good,
Than all the sages can.

--- William Wordsworth



> Mark
> For me, to say it is undefinable, means that we haven't tried hard
> enough yet.  We make up Quality, and then can't define it (yet).  So
> here is where approximation comes into effect with the use of
> analogies.  No analogy will be perfect, several are better than one,
> and analogies can contradict other analogies.  There is no problem
> with contradiction, since we are working outside the standard methods
> of logic.  We have to.  Logic has a beginning, and expands from that.
> What happens if the beginning cannot be encompassed by Truth?  Well
> that is where MOQ is.  Buddhism has plenty of analogies.
>
> Platt
Not only working outside of logic, but of concepts.

Mark

> Everything in our creation has to start with an assumption.  You have
> made one with Absolute Essence.  I think that is great.  The point of
> a metaphysics is, what can it do for us?  If your Essence provides
> great meaning for you, you have accomplished your goal.  If others
> join you, even better since there is company in numbers.  To try to
> pin one ontology down as more correct is a personal experience.
>
> Platt
Rarely do we see and argument that opens with the simple statement: "This is
my starting point, my initial premise, and it could be wrong."  One of the
strengths of Ham's philosophy is the clarity of  its premises.

 .

>
>