[MD] theories of truth

[David Harding]

> djh responds to Dmb:
> 
> I think you're both correct and incorrect here. You're correct that Mysticism and Intellectual quality do indeed work together.  But the key point here is that they work together by being mutually exclusive and in opposition!
> 
> [Ron]
> So you criticize Dmb for being a dialectician and then you assert dialectical opposition in your explanations, THAT has
> a whole set of consequences embedded in dichotomy, negation, ect...{serve up some Ham) 
> 
> djh responds:
> 
> Well as I've said repeatedly - ultimately definitions are degenerate but does that mean we shouldn't define? Is that even possible? I don't think it is so I think something better to be interested in (rather than trying to avoid degeneracy) is looking at what's good. What's good intellectually? There's an interesting question!
>  
> [Ron replies]
> But that has been the question, what is good intellectually and every arguement you counter with attacks that question dialecticly
> in opposition to it. Now that is interesting...is that what you guys see yourself as playing? dialectical opposition?

djh responds to Ron:

I don't know who you mean by 'you guys' but no, that's not what I'm 'playing'.  I'm here to discuss the MOQ intellectually and as a result become a better person.  As part of this discussion there will inevitably be disagreements.  Simply disagreeing with someone doesn't mean that I see my view as ultimately correct and their view ultimately incorrect as a dialectician might.  A true understanding of someone won't happen unless you look at what they value.  Traditional dialectic ignores folks values and so I think the MOQ is better in that it provides us with a language in which we can intellectually discuss these values and discuss quite simply - what's good.