> 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:
This is the whole argument in a nutshell right here
"labeling dynamic quality in any way that is taboo."
Is a fallacy.
There I said it! And I stand by it.
Dynamic Quality is meant to operate
As an abstract descriptor. We can describe a dynamic
Experience but we can not define Quality absolutely
As a noun because it holds dual meaning, and of
Course the real Quality is experience itself.
I think if we can agree on this point we can start
Discussing things in an MoQ. Context!
This eliminates the need for Bo's SOL.
Occam never had a closer shave.
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/
