[MD] Reading & Comprehension

[John Carl]

I agree completely Arlo,

tho I do kinda like "Art is a high reality endeavor"

John ready for some high reality


On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 6:59 AM, Arlo Bensinger <ajb102 at psu.edu> wrote:

> [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."
>
>
>
> 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/md/archives.html
>