Hi Davor,
I feel time as used in science is a concept, yes.
An engineer may say that change takes place over time.
This may lead one to believe that time is a measure of change and is derived
from perceived changes.
All very well, but the first measurements of change were related to the
cycles of night and day, seasonal changes and growth in biological entities.
The word time comes from the word 'tide' for example.
But change is not causal in the MOQ; change is a shift in patterns of value
towards new states of value, and the shift is an expression of a patterns
relationship with DQ.
Therefore time is DQ.
Truth time, the concept, is a static pattern of intellectual value.
Incidentally, this makes the use of truth time an immoral action, as it
represents the subjugation of intellectual value by inorganic value.
Throw away your watches!
All the best,
Squonk.
In a message dated 1/15/02 3:40:43 PM GMT Standard Time,
elkeaapheefteen@hotmail.com writes:
<< Subj: Re: MD Metaphysics of quality time
Date: 1/15/02 3:40:43 PM GMT Standard Time
From: elkeaapheefteen@hotmail.com (Chris Vlaar)
Sender: owner-moq_discuss@venus.co.uk
Reply-to: moq_discuss@moq.org
To: moq_discuss@moq.org
Hi Squonk, others
>From: SQUONKSTAIL@aol.com
>Reply-To: moq_discuss@moq.org
>To: moq_discuss@moq.org
>Subject: Re: MD Metaphysics of quality time
>Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 10:02:01 EST
>
>Hi Davor,
>Interesting stuff!
>
>Quality cannot be a description of anything as it is completely concept
>free,
>and time is a concept, as used in science for example.
>I propose two uses of the term time:
>1. Science time, or how i prefer to call it, Truth time.
>2. Quality.
Davor:
maybe a weird question but i really gave it some thought;
Is time really a concept?
>Truth time is a static concept based upon inorganic patterns of value, i.e.
>planetary motion.
>Quality, that is, Dynamic quality being the source of everything must
>therefore be what most people think of as time in its best sense.
>The disruption of staticly patterned truth time and an immersion in DQ has
>the wonderful effect of making truth time relative does it not?
>(Time flies when you're having fun!)
>
>All the best,
>Squonk.
>
>In a message dated 1/11/02 12:07:42 PM GMT Standard Time,
>elkeaapheefteen@hotmail.com writes:
>
><< Subj: MD Metaphysics of quality time
> Date: 1/11/02 12:07:42 PM GMT Standard Time
> From: elkeaapheefteen@hotmail.com (Chris Vlaar)
> Sender: owner-moq_discuss@venus.co.uk
> Reply-to: moq_discuss@moq.org
> To: moq_discuss@moq.org
>
> He all,
>
> Has quality anything to do with time? Is quality just another description
>of
> time or does it just seem to fit in the ''framework'' time very well?
>
> Past = static
> Future = dynamic
> Present = An event with both static and dynamic components, best
>experienced
> with a peace of mind or in ''flow''(the moment where the direct
>experience
> is synthesis of the static and dynamic, a total reduction of uncertainty
>and
> certainty, just wholeness)
>
> Sorry the last part is a bit cheesy formulated, too Hegelian?
>
> Davor
> >>
>
>
>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
>
>>
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 - 16:01:46 BST