Dan, Roger, 3WDave,
I'm pretty comfortable with "DQ is experience", while I have problems with "Q is
experience".
Correct me if I'm wrong, but if Quality is Reality, it means that Quality is
"all there is". So, stating that Quality is experience, is like to say that
experience is all there is. The result is that, according to the MOQ, there
should be a Dynamic experience and a static experience.... but, I have problems
with such a concept. Actually, if experience is all there is, what is the
outcome of experience? Experience?
On the other hand, assuming that Reality (Quality) is a *sinolos* of DQ and SQ,
and that DQ is experience, is IMO more productive. In this vision, real things
*interact* (so, they are DQ) and *exist* (so, they are SQ). Simultaneously.
The process can be seen from two different viewpoints:
seen from the SQ viewpoint (like the self is), I experience reality (DQ+SQ) by
means of a dynamic interaction: my dynamic side interacts with the dynamic side
of the reality I'm experiencing. DQ (the flow) is the sum of all the dynamic
sides of all things.
seen from the DQ viewpoint, DQ is a flow of experience that originates static
patterns.
(hoping Roger will let me use his famous.... ICBW)
bye
Marco
p.s.
tschao, Denis!
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