[MD] X = no-self

[Ian Glendinning]

Hi Magnus,

OK, "tactic" maybe has manipulative implications for you. Your
"deliberate and legitimate intention" was to ask unanswerable
questions (in the context).

Ian

On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 5:14 PM, Dan Glover <daneglover at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello everyone
>
> On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 10:57 AM, Ian Glendinning
> <ian.glendinning at gmail.com> wrote:
>> OK, Marsha, Dan, Horse,
>>
>> Dan, yep, I saw your tactic.
>
> Hi Ian
>
> I had no tactic, per se. My questions were legitimate, just not
> answerable in the traditional sense. Thus they made no sense, as
> Marsha observed.
>
> The "why metaphysics" question was not directed towards the discussion
> in general but rather towards Marsha's definition of self. The MOQ
> definition of self is laid out in LILA and other subsequent writings
> so there is no need to rehash it here, so far as I can see.
>
> But still, if a person needs to ask "why metaphysics" in a discussion
> group dedicated to the Metaphysics of Quality, what are they doing
> here in the first place? I thought that went without saying: We're all
> degenerates. Period.
>
> Dan
> 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
>