From: Mari (mld2001@adelphia.net)
Date: Fri Dec 06 2002 - 12:18:55 GMT
Hello Wim,
Thanks for your reply. i would still like to inquire a bit
further about the same words "new" and "type" as well as explain what i
meant by
" quantum relative ".
i think "new" can be for instance one more straw on the camels
back. Each straw is "new" in-so-far as the load has changed making it
different than the load before. That said there is the proverbial "straw
that broke the camels back" That one particular straw although no different
in many ways than the preceding ones that contributed to the "new" aspect of
the load now effects the end result differently than the one(s) "new" straw
(cumulative) that did not break the camels back.
When i said " quantum relative " i simply meant is your use of the word
"new" a quantum leap hence it "jump levels" and becomes "NEW" or "New"
instead of "new". And if the answer to that is yes then hasn't the "type" in
essence changed the pattern in a manner of speaking; an evolutionary leap
related to what came before but different enough that it has becomes
something else? A New Type of pattern.
A "pattern" is simply X isn't it?
Can you define "value" and "quality" in your own words for the record? Will
those definitions remain static forever?
i also have a few question about The Lords Prayer. When was it written? Who
wrote it? In what language? Who translated it? and when?
TY,
M
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 : Fri Dec 06 2002 - 12:19:40 GMT