Hello Steve >>>>>> 6. Static awareness. Each higher level evolved from the lower >>>>>> level but has become a discrete level. From the point of view >>>>>> of any level it is only possible to evaluate phenomena at that >>>>>> level. > > Steve: > I still don't see what is interesting about this statement. It sounds > tautological, but I think it is problematic because it implies that a > level is a point of view.
Regarding this; why is that a bad thing? I mean sure the anthropomorphic talk about the levels may be confusing, but that's just a language issue. If we can get past that don't you think it's fairly simple to say that the levels are different views on Quality? >>>>>> 7. Static dominance. Because each lower level is unable to >>>>>> evaluate the other levels, it considers itself to be the most >>>>>> moral and strives to dominate the others. >>>>> makes no sense. >>>> Same as above. >>> Steve: It's the same issue. Levels don't themselves evaluate >>> anything, they are categories for types of patterns of value. I >>> think all the personification of levels that goes on here is muddling >>> the MOQ. Regards Chris 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/
