Re: MD Schematic.

From: SQUONKSTAIL@aol.com
Date: Thu May 23 2002 - 15:51:01 BST


In a message dated 5/23/02 3:11:59 PM GMT Daylight Time, dlt44@ipa.net writes:

<< Subj: Re: MD Schematic.
 Date: 5/23/02 3:11:59 PM GMT Daylight Time
 From: dlt44@ipa.net (3dwavedave)
 Sender: owner-moq_discuss@venus.co.uk
 Reply-to: moq_discuss@moq.org
 To: moq_discuss@moq.org
 
 Squonk, all
 
 I think your intuition that schematically a "string" split rather than a
 "fork" one is right. However, it makes much more sense in using the Lila
 divisions than the ZaMM. Something like this:
 
 Dynamic Quality
 / | | \
 Static Qualities
 
 or this
 
 Dynamic Quality
 / | | \
 P B S I
 
 Quality "everything" might then be considered the union, as opposed to a
split.
 
 3WD >>

Hi 3DW,
ZMM gives us Quality as expansion of rationality.
Lila gives us a view of an expanded rationality with Quality in essence.

In this sense, ZMM is a search for an Ox and Lila is a return to the market
place?
>From the point of view of each, the other is not easy to live with?

Therefore you can only say Lila makes more sense if you accept its static
sturcture.
ZMM makes more sense if you wish to avoid structures.

Just recently i have been moving back towards ZMM and have been asking
questions from that percpective. You appear to have provided the answers!

All the best,
Squonk.

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 - 16:02:16 BST