From: Scott Roberts (jse885@localnet.com)
Date: Sun Sep 25 2005 - 02:55:12 BST
David M,
> DM said:
> I think this is important. My view is that we should understand DQ
> as that activity which determines what becomes actual from the
> options that are potentially available. The whole thing about levels
> is about how these levels enable DQ to reach further into the realm
> of the possible and make more complex posiibilities actual. SQ is
> always what is actual. But only certain potential patterns can be
> repeatedly drawn into the actual and this is what we call SQ.
>
> Scott:
> If all that is (according to the MOQ) is SQ and DQ, then what are those
> "certain potential patterns [that] can be repeatedly drawn into the actual
> and this is what we call SQ"?
DM: Well potential patterns (I was making a temporary distinction)
sounds like SQ to me too, this means that there is actualised SQ that
we can experience in the shared empirical realm, but yes also
potential SQ that we can experience in imagination and can nurse
maid into actuality via our individual activity -which is DQ in action.
Scott:
We are at cross-purposes here. For me experience includes imagination,
dreaming, thinking, feeling, willing, and sensing. The distinction I am
trying to point out is between potential form and experience. The actual,
being unique, is not a pattern, though it wouldn't be what it is without
patterns.
Scott said: They can't be SQ and they can't be DQ
DM: I think they can be. Once we see the difference between actualised
SQ and the larger realm of potential/infinite SQ. But potential and actual
may both be called real. Let's face it the potential that is not actualised
does influence the actualised. What else is a dream, an ideal?
Scott:
You missed the point, or rather, what I said referred to what you said
before: that SQ was actual. By the way, by 'actual' you seem to mean
'physical'. For me, a dream is actuality.
>Scott said:
I see SQ as being potential,
> since being a static pattern it is repeatable,
> the basic form which various
>actualities actualizes.
DM said:
????clarify
Scott:
Two different sentences can mean approximately the same thing. A spoken
sentence and a written sentence can mean the same thing. Bravery can be
actualized on a battlefield and in a hospital, and so on.
Scott prev:
Any experience is
> unique, yet follows pre-existing patterns in a more or less novel way,
> sometimes leading to new potential.
> One thing this shows to me (that I would
> see SQ as potential, while you see it as actual)
DM said: it is both
Scott:
How can something unique be a static pattern? The actual is something that
is neither DQ nor SQ, but a result of their interaction.
Scott prev:
is that there is something
> fundamentally missing from the MOQ, which results in poorly thought-out
> claims such as "reality = experience".
DM said:
You are limiting experience here, I say imagination is experience too.
DQ is an activity that pulls potential SQ (a unified realm) into the realm
of actual SQ
(a realm experienced via the many)
Scott:
As mentioned above, I was not limiting experience. It is you who seems to be
limiting "actual" to the contents of sense perception. My silently thinking
through the proof of the Pythagorean theorem is an actualization of the
theorem.
- Scott
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 -
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 : Sun Sep 25 2005 - 03:03:58 BST