[MD] Capitalism: my experience

[skutvik at online.no]

Hi Dave T.

6 March:

Bo before: 
> > Had you understood the MOQ you would have not said this, but alas.

DT: 
> It's pretty straight forward what RMP wrote. The number and
> arrangement of the words I'm sure we both agree on. But just like the
> religious folks do with the Bible, it's your the warping of the
> meaning and conclusions that's disconcerting. But I do see the humor
> in these claims:

Why don't you advice Craig about what "devastating critique" your 
unwarped MOQ can present Galen Strawson with? It's more than 
plain that only the SOL interpretation can do that, but some "chalk 
circle" (that hypnotized hens will not cross) prevents you from making 
it out of SOM. I don't for a moment think Strawson will surrender but 
at least he has no counter-argument. 

If you remember my reasoning how the levels control their parent, the 
intellectual level does it by making the social patterns subjects to 
OBJECTIVE  study and in the same - subsumption - way the MOQ 
will control intellect by making its  objective-over-subjective attitude a 
static level of its own dynamic/static arrangement . 

This argument Strawson can't counter by intellect's standard 
accusation of being an unprovable postulate. MOQ meets all 
science's criterions of being possible to test it and it will prove itself 
again and again. But most of you (the latter-day Pirsig included) does 
not subscribe to the MOQ, but to a "Quality/Explanation" metaphysics 
and this can Strawson easily shoot down.

You will remember that his (Strawson's) argument is that the SOM is 
a strawman and he is right regarding a SOM that says "reality is not 
quality" this is truly a strawman because the SOM says that quality 
belongs to the subjective realm. Thus it's not the "Reality=Quality" 
postulate that counts, but the dynamic/static divide OF QUALITY. 
This enables the MOQ to "say" that the S/O distinction belongs to its 
own static realm". That it must be the 4th. level is obvious,  thus it has 
applied the same control technique to the 4th. level that the 4th. 
applied to the 3rd.                  

Bodvar


PS

DT again:
> You laud the Dynamic in one breath, in the next shackle the MoQ into
> an absolute, undying, unchanging, fixed set of principles, while
> continuing to claim that what RMP put forward must be changed
> dramatically into your SOL version. Not just funny, but giggly
> silliness.

DQ is part of the MOQ like Gravity is part of Newtons theory that P. 
of ZAMM so correctly said.  And that the MOQ is "dynamic" 
iimpossible, its DQ/SQ arrangement is absolute.