Run that past me again Jos, I recognise the circularity - motive to betterness pre-supposes what is better - and that in reality there is a "lack of independence" - no simple causal relationships, just "dependent arisings", but unpick your last two sentences for me ... where you said ...
[Jos] > > Where given "improvements" are considered to be made within the defined subset moral codes of each observer defined set, I have of course lost all real sense of what it means to improve something, but have sucessfully (albeit badly) defined betterness. ... I'ts complete doublethink, but IMO a delusion of high quality. > Quality can of course go up as well as down, is that what you are saying ? As Gav says, MoQ is descriptive, not prescriptive. Regards, Ian Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
