Hello LS,
[To: Kevin, Greg , Richard, Jason and the rest of the LS]
Kevin wrote:
Carmen's & Kevin's Four Principles of Power:
I. The Power Principle:
Power is the capability to value Quality.
II. The Static Power Principle:
Static power is the capability to sustain static qualities.
III. The Dynamic Power Principle:
Dynamic power is the capability to evolve toward Dynamic Quality.
IV. The Necessity Principle:
Both static power and Dynamic power are necessary to valuing more
Quality.
V. The Morality Principle:
Dynamic power ought to be valued above static power.
Carmen: I will like to comment on part IV, The Necessity Principle. / and V.
There is something very important that I just don't know how to put enough
emphasis on. That is the "necessity or dependence" of the higher levels on the
lower levels. It is important, paramount, grandotote, hugemangus because it is
an 'action' principle. IT TELLS YOU WHAT IS WRONG and WHAT IS RIGHT.
{ "If the higher codes ignore their DEPENDENCE on the lower codes, the lower
codes
will comeback and DESTROY the upper codes." The higher codes might get away
with
it (ignoring the lower codes) but eventually, the lower codes come back
with a supernatural
force and will DEVOUR the higher codes.}
Somehow, that idea has to be integrated into those principles.
To put it on the same words as Don Greg Sterling (Don = Mister):
Greg wrote:
".......I just think that we need a
word to describe the opposite of Quality and Nadir seemed to fit the bill
better than any of the other words I was thinking of......"
If we don't understand COMPREHEND, the fact that the upper levels depend on the
lower level, we end up with NADIR instead of QUALITY.
I looked up the word NADIR. My dictionary says:
NADIR " 1: The point of the celestial sphere that is directly opposite
the Zenith and vertically downward from the observer.
2 : The lowest point.
So, I ask of Kevin, Greg , Richard, Jason and the rest of the LS to help either
re-word or add another notch to the power principles. I think maybe a
re-wording will be better, otherwise we will start adding and confusing without
end.
Caracoles!!! .........
..............My time is up, again. Life is beautiful, so much to do,
so little time.!
Please BE HAPPY.
Hasta la Vista,
Carmen.
Richard Budd wrote:
> Kevin-
> You are quite right, I have never seen this post before.
> The four principles are great (though I couldn't help but to notice that
> there are five of them). I can't really think of much to add to them
> except that the individual Moral levels and their respective pecking order
> might be added to the Morality principle.
> After I made that post yesterday I continued to mull the subject over and I
> eventually came to some ideas very similar in nature to what you and Carmen
> have done here. You seem to have found the thought I was looking for
> before I even started looking for it... wish I had seen it earlier.
>
> it's getting better all the time.
> Rick
>
> MOQ Online - http://www.moq.org
MOQ Online - http://www.moq.org
