From: Peterfabriani@aol.com
Date: Sat Nov 09 2002 - 21:09:30 GMT
Platt and all,
What is the resolution in ZAMM of the issue of why different papers get
different grades when graded by different professors?
Peter: Profs. Grade up those papers that agree with their own patterns of
value. You notice that which you value from the background aesthetic
continuum.
How is this relative evaluation reconciled with absolute good in the moq?
Peter: The absolute is not defined; it is absolute in that is IS.
Are some of the professors simply wrong while another is right about the
paper's worth?
Peter: Rhetoric is the static representation of spoken language. Spoken
language is capable of dynamic interaction. Not speaking at all and being
with the All is better still. There is no such thing as wrong or right -
there is better and worse. Therefore, some papers are better than others and
that can be recognised by a sophisticated evolved pattern of values that just
happens to be a Human being with a history of experiences of its own.
Or does each professor have a different experience of the same paper?
Peter: Yes.
Steve
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 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 09 2002 - 21:09:51 GMT