From: SQUONKSTAIL@aol.com
Date: Wed Jun 04 2003 - 13:51:22 BST
HI Squonk,
>I see this would reduce the gap between the debate between Quality and
>anthropocentrism, and free will. All patterns respond to what is best?
I'm not sure what the debate about anthropocentrism is exactly (that quality
is within the mind, that only humans perceive quality?) but, yeah, I think
it brings it everything together, reduces all gaps. (?)
And I think that that patterns sort of are what is best, more than they
respond to what is best. But that too, why not.
johnny
Sq: Yes, i see what you mean. 'What is best' is viewed as a static morality.
If something better is on the way, it may not look better at the moment of its
emergence.
Have been giving some thought to controlling Dynamic Quality - not capturing
it you understand, but drawing upon it - static latching followed by dynamic
potential for expanded creativity. That had me thinking about your views on
free will you see? Views i sympathise with. I was wondering if it is acting
freely to dice with coercing Dynamic influence, or is dicing with dynamic influence
the way everything evolves anyway?
Maybe our perceived choices are a highly evolved push forward that is not
really under our control. That we think it is under our control may be simply a
reflective feel of the push itself?
Living well in a stable relationship with DQ may be the highest evolved state
we know of?
squonk
P.S. looking forward to those quotes you promised!
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 : Wed Jun 04 2003 - 13:52:59 BST