Re: MD Has Quality been divided?

From: Steve Peterson (speterson@fast.net)
Date: Thu Nov 14 2002 - 00:12:27 GMT

  • Next message: Scott R: "Re: MD Sophocles not Socrates"

    Erin says:
    > I guess what is bothering me is that static and dynamic are adjectives
    > of the same *thing*.
    > I thought as the levels increase they offer more flexibility
    > or are more dynamic no?
    > It sounds like this to me:
    > food = hot food + cold food
    > and then you want to say hot and cold food are mutually
    > exclusive?
    > erin
    >
    Steve says: Yes, aren't they? I've been trying to say that hot and cold
    are mutually exclusive. The same food can't be both hot and cold. The same
    "quality" can't be both static and dynamic.

    I think I didn't understand what you were saying before but the food example
    may have cleared up something for me. Hot and cold are relative terms on a
    continuum. Are you thinking of static and dynamic quality as being on a
    continuum of dynamic-ness? I think of static and dynamic as an either/or.
    Value is either patterned or un-patterned.

    As far as the levels, I understand them as the levels of static quality.
    They are all static. Even patterns that offer more flexibility.

    Or maybe I've been thinking of the DQ/SQ distinction in the wrong way.

    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 : Thu Nov 14 2002 - 00:03:38 GMT