Ron prev: So it's safe to say quantity is a quality.
Jorge (current): No Ron, I'm sorry to differ again; it is not safe at all to say quantity is a quality. Ron: You are dividing quality by subject / object. Calling subjective, quality and quantity objective, when it all is quality every last bit. Man is the measure. Jorge: I don't recall who, but for sure was one of the old Greeks, realized a long time ago, that quality is a property of some thing (or ascribed to)whereas quantity is extrinsic to it. Ron: The inventors of SOM will think like this Jorge. Jorge: By no stretch of imagination I can figure out how can you say the same about quality in general and about Pirsig's DQ in particular. Ron: If you think about it in terms of Subject/object then no you can't See where I'm coming from. Jorge(current): Ron, I fail to see why are you so insistent in equating energy with DQ. I'd appreciate if you could put forward your reasons for doing so. It might very well be that I am missing something of what you've got in mind. Ron: I think this is how MoQ stands as it is. Energy is mystical And also measurable, Quality is mystical but also measurable. Both methods of measure are subjective and relative. Both May not be defined in any absolute terms both assume infinite forms. Both are (information encoded in ever higher emergent patterns, not reducible to the lower substrate patterns.)-Ian Define Energy, we should start from there. I really do not think this is chauvinism, I think this is MoQ. MoQ may be chauvinistic though, this is still open to debate. 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/ 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/
