[MD] The hard question.

[david buchanan]

Marsha said to dmb:
To make myself clear, I am not interested in a debate concerning the linguistic analysis of words, definitions and meaning so much as being interested in probing 'the way things are'.  The MoQ, after all, is a metaphysics, a theory concerning reality, not an aspect of linguistic philosophy. ...



dmb says:
The complaints are not about linguistic philosophy. The criticism is, quite simply, that your words and ideas are contradictory and incoherent. The problem, which you never address and do not seem to grasp regardless of how carefully it's explained, is that your statements are nonsense. The issue is that you've confused and conflated the MOQ's core concepts. Unless and until you address the substance of this often-repeated criticism, I'll remain convinced that you don't know what you're talking about.

But we both know that'll never happen. You'll just play some weasel game again, as usual. I could set my watch by it.