[MD] meaning.

[MarshaV]

On Apr 20, 2012, at 2:43 PM, david buchanan <dmbuchanan at hotmail.com> wrote:

> 
> Marsha asked dmb:
> What does "Unlike subject-object metaphysics the Metaphysics of Quality does not insist on a single exclusive truth."  (LILA, Chapter 8) mean to you?
> 
> 
> dmb says:
> It's a rejection of objective truth, a rejection of the correspondence theory of truth and an endorsement of pluralism.

Marsha:
Ending the same paragraph, RMP wrote:

"There are many sets of intellectual reality in existence and we can perceive some to have more quality than others, but that we do so is, in part, the result of our history and current patterns of values."


> Dmb continues:
> But that certainly does NOT mean that truth can include incoherent nonsense or self-serving bullshit.

Marsha:
It does not mean that truth can include incoherent nonsense or self-serving bullshit such as you, dmb, presented on Apr 10, 2012, at 1:33 PM, in the tread: Re: [MD] Awareness and consciousness in the MoQ, when you wrote to me:  "Everything you post in this forum is evidence of your anti-intellectualism, including all the misunderstood quotes you post and today is no exception.".  When I asked you to provide my exact statements and cite the posts they were taken from, you went silent, which left your comment in the column titled 'Unsubstantiated Self-Serving Bullshit'.  Further, when I asked you to define the 'intellectual' in your use of 'anti-intellectualism', you again went silent.  So once again your comment goes into the column entitled 'Unsubstantiated Self-Serving Bullshit'. And this time we can add it was incoherent since you could not provide understanding or definition for 'intellectual'.  I also think your use of the word 'Everything' from "Everything you post", and you've been warned before, is proof of you illogic.  It is a universal qualifier and it would only take one instance of me showing appreciation of anything "intellectual" to prove you wrong.  In the same post I am quoted as showing my admiration for epistemology, metaphysics, philosophy in general, and the MoQ.  You are, therefore, proven wrong.
  

> dmb:
> Rejecting a single exclusive truth does not mean rejecting things like agreement with experience, logical consistency, explanatory power, clarity and other kinds of intellectual quality.

Marsha:
I agree, but you have not demonstrated you know or understand what constitutes clarity and/or logical consistence.


> dmb:
> It does NOT mean that Marsha gets to make up whatever she likes and then call it truth.

Marsha:
It does not mean you, dmb, gets to make up whatever he likes and then call it truth.



Marsha