[Ham] As I understand it, Dynamic Quality is Value in the absolute metaphysical sense, while Static Quality is a reference to particular (i.e. relative)
values. If my interpretation is correct, then we needn't speak of DQ as having anything to do with choices or preferences as exhibited by inorganic or organic entities, inasmuch as no finite organism experiences it. [Krimel] Your understanding here is incorrect. Dynamic Quality is in no sense absolute. It is Heraclitian. It is ever changing and unpredictable. It is the source of novelty. It is full of surprises. It is "Aha" and "Oops". It is deterministic but unpredictable. It is seen in the creation and destruction of worlds. Ron: This discussion illustrates the need for clarity in meaning in MoQ Terms. What has to be realized is that Quality is dynamic as per Krimel. Dynamic quality has meaning only in reference to static quality And their context of reference. Therefore Ham mixes context and Understandably comes out with conflicts. As Ham shows us, when we use DQ/SQ intellectually to define The intellectual concept of Quality it creates modulations Of the container paradox. Essentially rendering DQ null And void, leaving us to discuss this static realm that Is now separated from it's source which plays right Into Hams thesis. We say he's got it wrong but we are unable To precisely tell him why he's mistaken about DQ. 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/
