Hi, John
>The "best" most durable patterns allow for a
>balance betwen the two. [coherence and freedom]
>
>This applies fully to the "Free Will or Determinism" question. Neither
extreme
>answer really works, so we have to find a compromise answer that allows for
>both.
I fully agree, but I'm starting to believe that such an answer might be
beyond the reach of rational language. Remember that in the domain of the
Intellect, Quality is revealed by simplicity, accordance to facts and
COHERENCE.
A good intellectual answer to freedom would need coherence, and hence it
would miss its mark by defining it. What we need to understand freedom isn't
intellectual quality but Dynamic Quality.
It seems obvious that freedom and Dynamic Quality (which, as we know, is an
event) are closely related if not synonymous. Defining Freedom might
therefore be the same kind of sacrilege that defining Quality is. In the
end, accepting it looks more to me like an "act of faith" (and I attach no
bad connotations to this term : what else are axioms, after all ?) than an
intellectual process.
>
>Jonathan
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:01:27 BST