[Krimel] It is my position that if properly applied the MoQ is a first step in providing a metaphysical unpinning to modern science. It should aspire to become what Pirsig said it would be: a metaphysics of randomness.
Dynamic Quality (which I vigorously maintain is not to be identified with Quality, regardless of whether or not Pirsig agrees to their conflation) is recognized in the degree of inconsistency within and among static patterns. Ron: Could you expand on this? Do you mean that the term simply serves to confuse Rather than explain? [Krimel] Increasingly I think science and I hope the MoQ, embraces a Heraclitian, Dynamic world in flux. I think Pirig's picture of an indefinable, unpredictable, uncertain reality composed of patterns and relationships (SQ) in flux (DQ) has much to offer but is not generally understood in these terms. Instead too much ink is spilled on the four levels which seem to mean whatever anyone wants them to mean. Ron; I think Because the intellectual level involves the experience of the individual. How the heck have you been? Are you teaching Quality? (said with an ironic smirk) 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/
