[MD] Reading & Comprehension

[Arlo Bensinger]

[Arlo previously]
It would be interesting to perform a find/replace of "Quality" with 
"reality" in ZMM/LILA and see if there are any places where such a 
substitution makes no sense, but I don't have my e-versions on this computer.

[Bo]
If you want an e-version of ZAMM I can send it over? Anyway, 
disregarding it's me the recently appointed BOgey who ask,  what was 
your reasoning or point. Or was it someone else who brought up the issue?

[Arlo]
I have an e-copy, was just at a different computer. I wasn't pressing 
any point, Marsha had brought up the notion that Quality is Reality, 
and I questioned that, and Platt was supporting it, and I just think 
its semantics but whatever. My point about substitution was that it 
creates some nonsensical statements, consider this from ZMM.

"Quality...you know what it is, yet you don't know what it is. But 
that's self-contradictory. But some things are better than others, 
that is, they have more quality." (ZMM)

This becomes, "[Reality]...you know what it is, yet you don't know 
what it is. But that's self-contradictory. But some things are better 
than others, that is, they have more [reality]."

"When you subtract quality you get squareness. Absence of Quality is 
the essence of squareness." (ZMM)

Becomes, "When you subtract [reality] you get squareness. Absence of 
[Reality] is the essence of squareness."

You've said you think "Reality is the primary empirical reality of 
reality" is a meaningful statement, but its about as tautologically 
insignificant as you can get. Besides implying that there may be a 
"secondary empirical reality of reality that is NOT Reality", its 
just wheel-spinning.

[Bo]
Who was it that "provided a quote?

[Arlo]
Either Platt or Marsha provided the quote "Quality is the primary 
empirical reality of the world".

Here's another, "This was the question, If everyone knows what 
quality is, why is there such a disagreement about it?" (ZMM). Or, 
"This was the question, If everyone knows what [reality] is, why is 
there such a disagreement about it?" Do you really think there is 
much disagreement on "what reality is"? I mean apart from the 
philosophers who argue such things? Do you think if you and I met in 
a bar we'd disagree on what in that bar constituted "reality"?

Two more for now.

"If it could speak the amoeba, without knowing anything about 
sulfuric acid, could say, 'This environment has poor quality.' If it 
had a nervous system it would act in a much more complex way to 
overcome the poor quality of the environment." (ZMM)

"If it could speak the amoeba, without knowing anything about 
sulfuric acid, could say, 'This environment has poor [reality].' If 
it had a nervous system it would act in a much more complex way to 
overcome the poor [reality] of the environment."

"Art is high-quality endeavor." (ZMM)

"Art is high-[reality] endeavor."