[MD] The reification issue completely misunderstood

[118]

On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 4:27 PM, Joseph  Maurer <jhmau at comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 6/8/11 4:43 PM, "118" <ununoctiums at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Joe,
>> The dynamic does not manifest, it IS.
>
> Hi Mark,
>
> I suppose there can be an unmanifest dynamic, but then how would I know?
>>
>> Words are useless in terms of the dynamic as you have correctly pointed out.
>>
>> If you take away words and the sense of other, you are left with DQ.  This is
>> where we live most of the time.  It is only in a societal function that we
>> live in sq.
>>
>> Mark
>
> I don't agree with your view of view DQ.  I prefer to leave it indefinable!
> In that way I don't have to compare it to words.  I'm not clear on what you
> mean by a 'societal function'.
>

[Mark]
I called it ineffable since there are not enough words to describe it.
 Undefinable means something else to me, and is itself a definfition
(like ineffable).  I do not like defining something as undefinable.

In terms of the societal level, I am making use of the different
levels in MoQ to explain much of our reality.  Without the societal
level, we do not have a concept of self.  This is because we cannot
compare ourselves to another.  Words are used by the societal level to
package thought in incomplete utterances which are then received by
the listener.  This is a form of static quality.  Outside of the
societal level, we live in dynamic quality.

Mark
>
> 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
>