Ham: Whereas evolution is fundamental to Dynamic Quality, it is not fundamental to my primary source. Essence, as I've defined it, is unchanging, immutable, static. Change (like MoQ's patterns) occurs (or is experienced) when Essence is actualized as difference. In my ontology, movement or "process" in space/time is an apparent reduction (negation) of Oneness into diversity, the individual phenomena being divided by nothingness. But, since Essence is absolute, it fills all voids with its value, and the "sensible agent" that is estranged from its essential source is the individual.self--you and me. Thus, in the MoQ sense, we are differentiated patterns of an ultimately undifferentiated source, and we experience this source as a dynamic system of infinite complexity. Which explains why my idea of S/O as a "dynamic" reality, and the ultimate source (DQ) as "static", expressed in words, seems to contradict yours. Ron: Hello Ham, Rather interesting statement. One question that immediately popped into my mind upon reading it, How does Essentialism account for change if change is the function of an individuals value awareness? Surely change occurs without observers or how else do observers originate? Leaving out evolution seems a less than an adequate approach.
Thanks 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/
