[MD] Betternes - 4 levels of!

[118]

Hi dmb,
No problem, happy to oblige.
Mark

On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 6:07 PM, david buchanan <dmbuchanan at hotmail.com>wrote:

>
> It's funny how all the evidence and reason goes missing from your response,
> especially since you tend to duplicate everything whether it's relevant or
> not. It's funny how this laziness evaporates when there's reason and
> evidence worth deleting.
> Thanks for proving my point.
>
>
>
> > Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2010 16:25:47 -0800
> > From: ununoctiums at gmail.com
> > To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
> > Subject: Re: [MD] Betternes - 4 levels of!
> >
> > 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.
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ___
> > >
> > >
> > > 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
> > >
> > 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
>
> 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
>