From: Michael Hamilton (thethemichael@gmail.com)
Date: Mon May 23 2005 - 19:37:57 BST
Hi everyone,
Again, apologies if I'm going over old ground.
It seems to me that DQ can be slotted very neatly into our existing SOM
language - Time. This just seems too obvious, but I can't yet see anything
wrong with it. Identifying the constant flux of the Big Long Now as Dynamic
Quality allows for a more complete and integrated understanding of time.
Rather than being an empty sequence, time can be seen as the constant
testing of static patterns for their relevance/adaptation to the whole. It
is, inevitably and necessarily, a process of evolution.
This raises a whole lot of questions. How does it fit in to the scientific
understanding of space and time as an integrated four-dimensional continuum?
How does it stand next to Kant, who saw time as a "mode of perception"? But
what I should really be asking first, is: does this sound crazy to you?
Regards,
Mike
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 : Mon May 23 2005 - 20:47:48 BST