[MD] Words and Metaphysical Mysticism.

[118]

Hi Joe,

I am not in disagreement with you.  I find your view quite enabling.
Emotions before they are intellectually converted to SQ.  That window from
which we view Things.

Glad it is working for you.

Mark

On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 2:28 PM, Joseph Maurer <jhmau at comcast.net> wrote:

> Hi David and All,
>
> Bare bones metaphysics!  Evolution, order, conception are still on the
> table.  For myself I like a theory of knowledge based on the acceptance of
> emotions as DQ.  Emotions are indefinable like DQ.
>
> Ladies seem to be closer to their emotions than men.  IMHO the metaphysics
> of indefinable emotions come closest to DQ reality.  They are validated in
> their expression.  Emotions are indefinable.
>
> I envision no mathematics of emotions!  Metaphysics of emotions are on the
> table as the source, the DQ basket.
>
> Joe
>
>
> On 9/5/12 6:30 PM, "David Harding" <davidjharding at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > You were giving yourself a way out..  You don't seem interested in
> ideas.  You
> > just want to continually say - the fundamental nature of static quality
> is
> > dynamic quality.  End of story.. what's to talk about?   I want to talk
> about
> > the static patterns of the MOQ as this is what is valuable to do -
> > intellectually.  Interesting to see if you change your tune...
>
>
> 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
>