From: johnny moral (johnnymoral@hotmail.com)
Date: Wed Jun 02 2004 - 17:47:53 BST
Hi Mark,
>JM:
>Does anyone care to comment on the time component of patterns, how they
>ontologically continue the past into the future?
>Mark 2-6-04: That's a blasted good question. Time is a pattern.
I hadn't been thinking of time as a pattern, actually. Maybe an Hour or a
Year is a pattern, but time itself? I'm not sure how to figure that. Time
is sort of created by patterns repeating themselves forward into the future.
I don't know, that adds a confusing element to what I was getting at.
>JM:
>Also, patterns explain
>what consciousness is - it is patterns. Patterns are all that
>consciousness is conscious of, and patterns could not exist without
>consciousness to see them into the future.
>
>Mark 2-6-04: I feel you are suggesting an objective nature for time which
>acts as a backdrop to what consciousness does Johnny? "...how they
>ontologically
>continue the past into the future?"
What I mean is that this table in front of me is a pattern in that it is the
table now, it repeats to be the table now, it repeats to be the table now,
it repeats to be the table now, and so on, following the pattern. It
repeats itself and ontologically creates itself. The pattern is that it
continues to be the table, not just that is statically a pattern of a table
but might vanish in the next instant. The pattern is that it continues to
be. The pattern isn't that it has four legs and a top, that is a pattern of
tables in general, and in that same way that is the pattern of tables in
general now, the pattern of tables in general now, and so on. That pattern
repeats too. If a pattern doesn't bring itself into the future by repeating
itself from the past, then it isn't a pattern. See what I mean?
>They, 'patterns' do not inhere in Time.
>Patterns inhere in coherent relationships which respond to DQ depending on
>degree of coherence, which are then construed as forming a temporal
>continuum.
I think to "inhere" means to take up time, to go from moment to moment being
in something. So yes, I do think patterns inhere in time. Relationships
inhere in time too, things in a relationship take time to relate to one
another. DQ is all about time, moving the cutting edge of the what is (SQ)
into what will be (SQ'), according to all the patterns together, the
strongest most valued patterns having the greatest strength to repeat and
reaffirm their value.
>Consciousness is degrees of coherence, and this means degrees of SQ-SQ
>[SQ-DQ?]
>tension. Time is one such tension, but it is primarily the value of
>relationships.
>Good relationships have a high sense of coherence, and at this degree of
>value
>time can appear to stop in wonder, joy, beauty?
Yeah, but that's more a poetic observation than I am getting at. I'm just
trying to explain the way patterns of morality become reality to a
consciousness.
>Biological coherence does the same thing if you have ever been chased by a
>threat. Run away! Run away! No time here.
That's a good strong pattern!
>That's what i think anyway!
>All the best,
>Mark
Thaks for your thoughts, I'll keep musing about time as a pattern. For now
I think it is unnecessary to consider it a pattern in itself.
Johnny M
_________________________________________________________________
FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar – get it now!
http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/
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 02 2004 - 17:50:23 BST