Struan,
My understanding of Quality seems to be different from the generally
accepted view. I regard Quality as being the force that is responsible for
the physical organization of the universe. In my mind it is not equivalent
to Good and value and morality but is the generator of them. Nor is it the
same as Dynamic Quality because it is not dynamic. In my view Dynamic
Quality applies only to the sentient portion of the universe because it is
continually changing in response to the myriad demands of humanity. Nothing
needs to move toward Quality.
I am interested in knowing what your view of the source of the good is.
As you say, a definition and source of "the good" is a definite requirement
for the validity of the MoQ. I have puzzled over this for some time and can
find no source for "good" except the universe. I have tried to make Quality
the generator of "good" in the universe and now you have shot me down.
Certainly there is no generally accepted definition within humanity. Where
else are we going to look. Maybe there is no source and the MoQ is a bunch
of crap. Maybe "good" is only applicable to certain narrow groups with each
group having a different definition. I will be interested to hear your
views. At the moment I am up the creek without a paddle. Ken
MOQ Online Homepage - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Unsubscribe - http://www.moq.org/md/index.html
MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:03:05 BST