Re: MD Has Quality been divided?

From: Steve Peterson (speterson@fast.net)
Date: Wed Nov 13 2002 - 16:44:23 GMT

  • Next message: Matt the Enraged Endorphin: "Re: MD Absolute Quality between ZMM and Lila"

    Pete, erin, Davor, all,

    >Erin said:
    >>>> If I am remembering correctly Bo had given a metaphor of
    >>>> it being the ocean and sq being the waves.
    >>>> This makes sense to me.
    >>
    >>Steve said:
    >> Is the ģit" that is "being the oceanē Quality or Dynamic Quality?
    >>
    >
    >> Either way you slice it, it seems to me that dynamic and static quality are
    >> mutually exclusive, but I'd be interested to hear what others may have to
    >> say. I've been wrong before...
    >>
    >>
    > Erin said:
    > Why do you think waves and the ocean are mutually excusive?
    > erin
    >
    Steve:
    I see what I think is your point: that waves are parts of the ocean and no
    line can be drawn to separate the ocean from the waves. But this seems
    awkward to me. The waves would then become "static dynamic quality" while
    the non-wavy ocean is "dynamic dynamic quality."

    I was thinking of the static quality as the edge that is created by the
    waves but not including the water--sort of a "through the looking glass"
    view compared to the train metaphor where the leading edge of the train is
    the dynamic aspect of pre-intellectual un-patterned (dynamic) Quality.
    Viewed from within static patterns, the edge is DQ. From the ocean's point
    of view, the edge is SQ.

    In that way, thinking of the ocean as DQ would work for me, but calling the
    ocean DQ and the watery non-edgy part of the waves SQ makes SQ a type of DQ.

    I guess it doesn't really matter if we disagree about how this analogy is
    useful. But whether or not we think SQ as made of (thus containing) DQ
    could be important. I think I have heard others say that static patterns do
    not contain any DQ.

    >
    >Davor says:
    >I do not particularly like the ocean/waves analogy, I better like William
    >james his favorite of the river as being the dynamic, and to add my two
    >eurocents the static would be the sediment left behind by it?

    Steve says:

    One good thing about the ocean analogy is that the waves and the ocean are
    the same "stuff." It avoids a dual reality (river/sediment) that most
    people's religious ideas seem to assume.

    I'm still going with Quality=SQ+DQ where both SQ and DQ could be thought of
    as the "edge" of Quality depending on the perspective. I think erin and
    Peter are saying SQ is contained within DQ. (correct me if I'm wrong, erin
    and Peter.) Davor (or anyone), What do you think?

    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 : Wed Nov 13 2002 - 16:37:09 GMT