[MD] Betternes - 4 levels of!

[MarshaV]

Ohhh, but that mirror...      


  
On Nov 9, 2010, at 7:25 PM, 118 wrote:

> Hey Marsha,
> I hear you.  I thought we had gotten over this whole concept of what is more
> True.  I thought that was in ZMM.  Perhaps my interpretation is different
> than some others.  While I may be an egoist, I stand corrected all the time.
> So, at least you are not talking about me.
> 
> Who's got that flag with the Big Q on it?  Why is he running around
> erratically pushing people out of his way?  Where is he off to, seems like
> circles to me?  Saw that on a farm once, when we went out to get something
> for dinner from the chicken coop.  Tasted pretty good cooked though.
> 
> Mark
> 
> On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 12:23 PM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> dmb,
>> 
>> I am convinced in the same way that egotists are incorrigible for
>> psychological reasons and they cannot or will not be corrected by evidence
>> or reason.  When, for instance,  they deny that truth within the MoQ is
>> relative while the MoQ Textbook clearly states "the MOQ follows a pragmatic
>> notion of truth so truth is seen as relative in his system while Quality is
>> seen as absolute."
>> 
>> 
>> Marsha
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Nov 9, 2010, at 1:34 PM, david buchanan wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> dmb says:
>>> 
>>> I'm convinced that theists are incorrigible for psychological reasons and
>> they cannot or will not be corrected by evidence or reason. And if that's
>> where you're at, so to speak, your place is in a church and you shouldn't be
>> surprised when your theism is not well received in a philosophy discussion.
>> Considering the atheistic and even anti-theistic stance of the MOQ's author,
>> you'd have to be a bit nuts to think that kind of thing would fly in this
>> context. Waving the theism flag around here is way beyond mere confusion, my
>> friend.
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ___

 
___