From: -Peter (pcorteen@gmail.com)
Date: Tue Nov 08 2005 - 16:03:08 GMT
Case,
you said, about the view that everything is ultimately causally connected,
that such strict determinism is part of a Newtonian paradigm that has been
discredited. If that is true then things are either not connected or they
are acausally connected ;-)
It's the acausal connectivety that I'm especially interested in. I call
myself an atheist yet it is impossible to deny that there is an organising
principle in nature.
I have been developing a computer simulation of the Toaist I-ching oracle
recently. In testing it's workings I have noticed that when I let the
program generate lines when I am not interested in what kind of line is
generated then, from following mathematical probability, I get a
preponderance of the the most common line (static yin); however, when I am
interested in what lines are generated then the program seems to respond by
supplying lines that have a lower probability of occurring.
Also, while placing pencil marks on wall paper recently, in preparation for
cutting, without thinking I casually guessed and made a mark without using
the ruler as is my habit in such situations because I pride myself on my
visual faculties; of course I had to confirm the estimated position by using
the ruler but was astounded to find my original mark did not need to be
changed at all. Just a very good guess I suppose.
-Pete
On 07/11/05, Case <Case@ispots.com> wrote:
>
> Pete,
> To the extent that chaos is change gone wild it is DQ. Mark and other
> insist
> on equating DQ with Quality itself which leads to a lot of muddled
> thinking.
> Those who argue for the strict determinism you mention in your last
> sentence
> are stuck in a Newtonian paradigm. This view has been soundly discredited.
> Case
>
>
> Hi Mark,
>
> I'm interested in the idea of chaos (and randomness) in relation to DQ but
> I
> don't know what is the Plotinian One.
>
> Dynamic Quality I see as something as yet formless but just about to start
> to crystallise; a random event could begin this crystallisation. On the
> other hand some people would argue that there is no randomness because
> everything is ultimately causally connected.
>
> -Pete
>
>
>
> MOQ.ORG <http://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
>
>
-- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Peter Corteen Home: +44 (0)208-882-7898 Mobile: +44 (0)776-667-1194 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 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 : Sun Nov 20 2005 - 00:27:21 GMT