From: Valuemetaphysics@aol.com
Date: Wed Jun 02 2004 - 21:08:06 BST
Hi Mark
I am not sure we should associate time with patterns.
Mark 2-6-04: Hi David M, Pirsig suggests it may be a mistake to assign
objectivity to anything. Where does this leave time? We have a sense of time from
our biological patterning, and we have the provisional concepts of time in
science. Thus, time has a history! If time has a history, what stops an infinite
regression of previous notions of time?
If you recourse to absolute time then Stephen Hawking is waiting to hear from
you David. ;)
I see patterns as a snap shot, perhaps an enduring one.
There is a chair. It stays the same, in that sense it is timeless.
When process kicks in, when the chair rots away we can experience
time. Imagine nothing changing at all, would we cease to have time?
So time perhaps should be linked to patterns breaking down and
patterns emerging from nothing, and they go back to nothing.
Mark 2-6-04: But you have just said, 'I am not sure we should associate time
with patterns.' And now you are saying, 'So time perhaps should be linked to
patterns breaking down and
patterns emerging from nothing, and they go back to nothing.'
For example a person dies, the same atoms will be lying in the
death bed but the capacity to change dynamically will have departed.
Make any sense?
regards
David M
Mark 2-6-04: Atoms are scientific concepts. Concepts are provisional.
Concepts are not the primary empirical nature of experience. The MOQ says Quality is
the primary empirical nature of experience, with concepts forming a static
hierarchy depending on their pragmatic value.
The concept of time has high pragmatic value, but it is a static pattern non
the less.
I understand what you are saying about atoms and corpses, but atoms are
Inorganic patterns of value in the MOQ. We know what the MOQ says about how Inor
ganic patterns form Organic patterns, and these aspects of the event stream are
empirically verifiable postulations which are themselves part of the static
intellectual pattern of value which is the MOQ itself.
The best way i feel we may combine static patterns and DQ is in coherence.
Increase in coherence is the MOQ's way of describing the processes you indicate
with your example of atoms and corpse.
A Human being is more coherent than a corpse.
(Unless you happen to be Paul Wolfovitze?)
All the best,
Mark
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 - 21:11:35 BST