[MD] The reification issue completely misunderstood

[david buchanan]

Dan Glover wrote:
I've never understood what Marsha has been on about with her reification, either. It always seemed like a thinly-veiled attempt at re-introducing SOM as intellect, and why anyone would want to perpetuate such a ludicrous notion is beyond me. I don't have an academic degree nor am I likely to any time soon, but I do know what Quality is, and that isn't it.

Marsha replied:
Quality is not any-thing(it).  I agree.   Not this, not that...  



dmb says:
Right, those freshmen composition students didn't have an academic degree either, but they knew quality when they saw it. A consensus always formed about which essays were best and they soon were convinced that quality was real and they could detect it even if they couldn't give intelligible reasons for their choice. 
I agree that Marsha's ludicrous notions do not have any detectable quality, or rather they have a detectable, namable negative qualities like disagreement with the evidence, incoherent and, if held, they have a self-defeating, paralyzing effect. 
If somebody pressed me to thinK of something good, anything good about whatever "Marsha has been on about with her reification", I'd be stumped for an answer.