From: Wim Nusselder (wim.nusselder@antenna.nl)
Date: Tue Oct 07 2003 - 19:37:47 BST
Dear Paul & others involved in this thread,
Would it be useful to use 'person' for the patterns of value recognized as
and associated to someone by others?
It would then be something like what you wrote 7 Oct 2003 10:50:44 +0100
except for the '[Dynamic] capability to change for the better':
'an inorganic pattern of stable quantum probabilities, organised by DNA into
a biological body valuing survival and reproduction, many social
relationships valuing status, authority, and social stability, a collection
of structured concepts and ideas valuing a coherent conceptual organisation,
explanation and prediction of experience'.
We can recognize change in others and associate new/changed patterns of
value with that person, because they somehow come as a 'whole' with
old/unchanged ones. We cannot detect 'capability for change' in others,
however.
They way we experience our 'selves', our 'I'-experience, is then that
'capability to change for the better' within the limitations that are set by
the fact that (the different patterns of value of) our 'person' cannot
change faster than the normal pace of change at their respective levels of
static quality.
'I' am/is caged in my 'person'/'personality'. 'I' can only 'act' with/on
existing patterns of value. 'Agency' is never free-floating, but always
linked/chained to 'personality'.
The modern inability to recognize divine (ultimate) agency is the inability
to recognize the whole of 'creation', all patterns of value, as belonging
together, as a 'personal God'.
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 : Tue Oct 07 2003 - 19:37:03 BST