MD coherence

From: Wim Nusselder (wim.nusselder@antenna.nl)
Date: Fri Aug 27 2004 - 06:53:12 BST

  • Next message: Wim Nusselder: "Re: MD MOQ and The Moral Evolution of Society."

    Dear Mark M.,

    I wrote 6 Jul 2004 14:35:19 +0200:
    'THE coherent combination or THE sweet spot ... doesn't exist. Pretending it
    does (e.g. by naming it 'freedom and quality') implies making DQ (emergent
    5th level patterns of value) subservient to 4th level symbolism.'

    You replied 6 Jul 2004 13:53:00 -0400
    'Sweet spot is a real language idiom. There is little point in denying this?
    The question is, "What is a sweet spot?"
    Applying the MOQ provides a revealing insight: Coherence between static
    patterns of value such that DQ becomes more influential. To put this another
    way, coherence is, "freedom from static patterns across static patterns."'

    The problem may be that I know of no equivalent of 'sweet spot' in Dutch and
    that I have seen it used in English only in your writings (and replies by
    others) on this list. It doesn't help me to get more insight.
    Coherence has an equivalent in Dutch. Experiencing 'coherence between
    patterns of value of different levels' means the experience that they
    somehow fit together in a specific combination. If coherence is situational
    according to you, you agree with me that 'THE coherent combination ...
    doesn't exist' and you can forget about my criticism that 'objective'
    coherence implies making DQ subservient to 4th level patterns of value.

    I am not sure whether addition of 'coherence' as 'freedom from patterns of
    value across patterns of value from different levels' or as 'a combination
    of patterns of value of different levels that increases DQ influence' is
    useful for me. Until now you writings about 'coherence' have mainly made it
    difficult for me to understand you and not added much to my understanding.

    I have been writing tentatively on this list occasionally about more
    (stability, versatility and) harmony with higher level patterns of value
    being what makes one pattern of value (at a specific level) 'better' than
    another one (at the same level). I.e. more (stability, versatility and)
    harmony across levels may be what shows us DQ when a specific pattern of val
    ue evolves into another one at a specific level. If this 'harmony' is what
    you mean with 'coherence', I'm fine with it, but I don't need it.
    If by 'coherence' you mean a different kind of experience that adds to or
    combines the experience of static quality and Dynamic Quality, I'm having
    problems with it.

    With friendly greetings,

    Wim

    MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
    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 Aug 27 2004 - 07:01:51 BST