> Joe (It is Joe, also, correct?):
> > I have difficulty with the word ³abstract² used
> for
> > DQ!
>
> SA previously: Yes, I don't agree with this detail
of what Ron
> said either for if we're talking about abstract
> thoughts/intellect, well, that's an intellectual
> pattern. When it comes to labeling dynamic quality
> in any way that is taboo.
Ron:
> Addition:
> THIS is why the MoQ is paralyzed, the conflagration
> of Quality with DQ.
> Thus arresting it's method of explanation via
> passive/active understanding.
SA: This is one event I've learned by being on this
forum. I can say another is a more happy co-existence
with technology, which I strived for even before
participating on this forum, but even more since I
joined. I accept Quality is not dq and Quality is not
sq - Quality is neither of these solely, but Quality
is both of these and it is Quality that is the monism.
Dq and sq are able to work together, integrating, and
from this coming together of sq and dq - creativity,
the abyss of Quality.
I'm wondering why you added this. You stated
above that abstract thought is dynamic quality.
SA
____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
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/
