[MD] Emptiness & Quantum Mechancics

[Andre Broersen]

  Marsha to dmb:

It's a matter of interpretation.  My primary mission is not to support  'contemporary pragmatism'.
Your approach is your approach,  Mine is different.  You can flap you gums all you want; it makes
no difference to me.  The text I choose you redefine to suit your support of contemporary pragmatism,
and act as if you have channeled RMPs  thoughts.  For instance where it is stated that truth is seen
as relative.

     Anthony writes:
     ?Intellectual values include truth, justice, freedom, democracy and,
     trial by jury. It?s worth noting that the MOQ follows a pragmatic
     notion of truth so truth is seen as relative in his system while
     Quality is seen as absolute.  In consequence, the truth is defined
     as the highest quality intellectual explanation at a given time.
            (McWatt,Anthony,MOQ Textbook)


You seem to ignore evidence that doesn't suit your argument, ore define it.  I don't buy your strategy.

Andre:
Marsha, of late, has used the above quote to defend her notion of truth as relative, and, more importantly
that truth, in the MOQ, is treated as a relative term.

Firstly she states that 'My primary mission is NOT to support 'contemporary pragmatism'. (my emphasis).
However, Anthony's quote most definately states that the 'MOQ follows a pragmatic notion of truth...'.

This immediately dismisses the import of the use of this quote.

Marsha says: 'Your(or for that matter the MOQ) approach is your (or the MOQ) approach. Mine is different.

Thus Marsha is not interested in the MOQ approach to truth claims.

Further, she also (conveniently?) fails to acknowledge a reference to a footnote contained in the same
quote which occurs at the end of the '...Quality is seen as absolute' sentence. This footnote says: 'The
pragmatic notion of truth is examined further in Section 2.7'.

As stated above, Marsha is not in support of pragmatism, let alone a 'pragmatic notion of truth'.

So how she can use a quote, which she rejects herself, to validate her own stance on the relative nature of
truth is beyond me.