Defining Dynamic Quality
Hi Diana and Roger
ROGER:
> 1) Quality is an event or experience.
As I understand it Quality/Value is Reality. Quality is then sub-divided into
Dynamic and Static Quality.
> 2) Dynamic Quality is the conceptually unknown part of the quality event. It
> is the cutting or front edge of experience. It is the source of all.
Isn't it the case that DQ is ALSO events or experiences. This was one reason
why I suggested that DQ needs to be divided as per SQ.
> 3) Static quality is the wake of this quality event or experience. It includes
> subjects and objects (things), memories, maps of reality, customs, etc.
In other words the 4 level latching mechanism which creates stability.
==================================================
DIANA:
>> I don't know. Jonathan recently referred to "cartographic exercises" which
>> are like our mental recreations or memories of experience. I think this is
>> where the static Q experience emerges. Experience is pure value, pure DQ.
>> Static value is the cartographic output.
> The rest of your post builds on this assumption, but you have to show
> that this assumption is correct first.
Axiom - Quality is Reality
Quality is identical with Value
Quality = Value = Reality
Quality is divisible into two sub-components Dynamic Quality and Static Quality
Proposal - Dynamic Quality and the process of change are coincident
Proposal - Dynamic Quality is recognition of a particular change event
Proposal - Static Quality is that which remains after change
Dynamic Quality is identified with the process of change or movement from being
(present) to becoming (future). The process of change is a continual process, the
future continually being formed from the present (Formative DQ). From a human
point of view the actual moment of change - the event itself - is prior to the
realization of the event as there is a finite period needed for the intellectualization
of the event. So from the intellectual perspective the change event is always in the
past.
Recognition of a change event contributes to change in the recognizer and is thus
also Dynamic Quality (Contributive DQ).
"Experience is DQ"
It is suggested that experience is Dynamic Quality.
If this is the case then experience must be coincident with either the process of
change or recognition of the change event.
Experience is the process of being affected by physical or non-physical
circumstances - interaction with the world - the outcome of which is change from
one state to another different state, a Dynamic process.
Experience, as stated above, is also a continuous process as interaction with the
world and thus change from one state to another, is both continual and
continuous. Experience and Dynamic Quality are coincident.
"Static value is the cartographic output"
Static Quality has been sub-divided into 4 levels based, primarily, on an
evolutionary division. Static Quality is the stable state of the world at any
particular moment. It is a means of distinguishing order from change and
represents a viable system of catagorising what exists in the world. Static value
itself is not strictly the cartographic output but the reality/basis upon which a
model of the world can be created. A map is a two dimensional form of model. A
model is a more complex structure than a map and contains more information
with the addition of another dimension - depth. The model is an Intellectual device
but can be used to produce and convey information by means of language. So the
above statement should be modified to something like "Static value is the basis
for the construction of a cartographic representation of the world".
Diana, a final word before I finish regarding the last part of your statement :
"...you have to show that this assumption is correct first."
If by this you mean that there must be proof, then this is not strictly correct. No
theory, within the SOM framework of scientific method, can be proven. A theory
will, at best, remain not unproven. In order for a theory to be valid it must be
structured in such a way as to be disprovable and it should be reasonable,
otherwise it is ideology. I think that the above goes a fair way to showing that the
first statement ("Experience is DQ") is reasonable and supportable within a
theoretical framework, providing a means for argument and disprovability and the
second part ("Static value is the cartographic output") once modified, is a
reasonable statement about the intellectualised interpretation of the world.
Feel free to disagree :)
Horse
"Making history, it turned out, was quite easy.
It was what got written down.
It was as simple as that!"
Sir Sam Vimes.
homepage - http://www.moq.org
queries - mailto:moq@moq.org
unsubscribe - mailto:majordomo@moq.org with UNSUBSCRIBE MOQ_DISCUSS in
body of email
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:36 BST