Hi Dan,
> Hi Marco
>
> Thank you for the analogy. I do see what you're saying and I appreciate how
> difficult it must be discussing something as complex as the MOQ in a foreign
> language. We cannot find Dynamic Quality by looking for it. We respond to
> it. The MOQ does not subscribe to an "inside" and "around us" notion,
Agree. "Inside", "around" and other terms for the placement of DQ in space or
time are always inadequate and merely metaphorical.
> rather
> it states there is nothing but static patterns of value, plus undefined
> Dynamic Quality.
well, even to say that there "are" static patterns and there "is" an undefined
DQ is inadequate and metaphorical. IMO SQ and DQ are just the best way we can
use to describe reality, I can't be sure that there "are" such ...... things
> >Dan:
> > > yet [rocks, plants, governments] are all concepts,
> > > otherwise, what are they?
> >
> >Marco:
> >A plant is not a concept. This is the problem we have. There's a plant (a
> >living
> >organism, a mix of patterns), and there's the concept "PLANT". Not the
> >same.
> >(See below my answer to Rog).
>
> Dan:
>
> Yes this seems to be the core of our disagreement. Consider for a moment
> that the plant you see is not the plant that is sitting outside your window.
> It is inside your mind. There may well be a plant sitting outside your
> window but no one has ever seen one directly. Can we agree on this?
yes. The idea of the PLANT is not like the plant. Just an approximation. By the
way, I think that this PLANT sitting in my mind is very similar to the PLANT
sitting in the mind of my dog who's used to piss on it. In other terms, this
ability of building such images in our minds is not the MOQ intellect, it's just
a biological faculty.
> As Roger says, we must remember reality is contextual. How can there be a
> solid tree without a concept of a tree? What tree? To even talk about a tree
> is to assume the context of a tree. Tell me how I am wrong.
Let's not mess reality (something we can investigate or not, thus does not need
necessarily concepts to exist) and truth (something we have investigated and we
can agree upon, and it's made of concepts). As I know him, Roger is also very
careful to avoid absurdities. So, as my dog and the plant can't make sex and
have dogtree children, I'm pretty sure that this PLANT sitting in my mind is
pointing to something, and the DOG pissing on the PLANT is pointing to something
else. Whatever they are, it is highly probable (evident, I'd say) that the dog
and the plant are made of different biological static patterns. That's what I
mean when I say that a plant, in order to be a plant, doesn't need the PLANT
concept. ICBW, but, please, tell me how.
> >Dan:
> > > It seems doubtful we will ever agree on a Dynamic experience for there
> >is no
> > > way to say what that experience is.
> >
> >Marco:
> >Ergo: It seems doubtful we will ever agree on DQ for there is no way to say
> >what
> >that Quality is. As it is not possible to have two different undefinable
> >things
> >(as, in that case, we'd have a borderline, thus a definition) you are
> >stating
> >that Quality and experience are the same. And I've agreed. So, let's
> >eliminate
> >the term experience, and just call it with its MOQish name: Quality. Or, at
> >least, let's assume Experience as a synonymous of Quality (like Value, for
> >example) thus accept that there is a Dynamic Experience (experiencing) and
> >a
> >Static Experience (the experienced).
>
> Dan:
>
> Experience is experience. Quality CAN be defined, to a point. That is what
> we are attempting here.
You are puzzling me. In the beginning of this thread I was convinced that
experience is undefinable, thus experience is DQ. Then, you have convinced me
that experience is reality... ( and reality " CAN be defined, to a point. That
is what we are attempting here", or not?) So, I have stated "sorry, I was
wrong, experience is reality and it's partly defined and partly undefinable".
But now you have turned to experience as undefinable..... (?)
Tell me. Don't you agree that the there's no place for two different undefinable
things?
thanks,
Marco
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 - 16:01:28 BST