Hi Ron, I think this experiment may have just about run its course and i thank you for taking it in the spirit it was presented. You make me smile. I agree with much that you say.
My own view is that the moq poorly states the relationship between DQ and sq. I think the term sq needs to be replaced by a spectrum of patterns which convey their dynamic status. Cheers Ron, squonk Hello Squonk, I agree, coincidentally I'm in pursuit of this very concept as we speak. I'm researching how Aristotle used the abstract concrete distinction and propose to substitute Dq/Sq in it's stead. Comprehensively what it would do is provide a context in which DQ/SQ may operate in. I think sticking to the abstract contextual use of linguistic descriptors of experience works better than treating them as concrete particulars which "interact". I think once we move into the concrete particular reference of the terms we move from MoQ back to SOM. which consequently falls to the same paradoxes of mind/matter. -Ron Hi Ron, I look forward to reading your ideas when you have them ready. I quite like Aristotle. squonk 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/
