Greetings Squonk,?
?
Sorry to interrupt, but I am trying to understand your point-of-view.

Hi Marsha,
There's not need to be sorry for anything - this is a free group.
Well, when i say free.

Marsha:
Are you suggesting that a static pattern (any static pattern) is permanent, or 
like a thing in itself?

s: I don't know.
It's no surprise you may not understand my point of view, because i don't fully 
understand it either. In a sense, Pirsig doesn't understand his point of view; 
we are all in the same boat.
If sq and DQ are absolutely necessary then they both exist don't they?
I suppose i'm exploring what static patterns are as things that absolutely have 
to exist.

Marsha:
Aren't static patterns still process within the field of DQ?

s: This sounds good to me.
I argued for this in Liverpool 2005, but it got?edited out of the dvd 
apparently, so i can't ask you to consider it. I don't know if this is true 
because i've not seen it, maybe you could confirm it for me please Marsha?
If static patterns are processes within the field of DQ, then it would appear 
some processes are more dynamic than others,?and not simply those separated 
by?the 4 levels of evolutionary development.?I don't have a problem with this. 
I think it could lead to some cool things.

TE1 suggests that the blank slate human brain is an exceptionaly dynamic 
process. I understand TE1?may have?disturbed you Marsha, but it's been most 
helpful for me in ways i did not anticipate, so it was well worth it as far as 
i'm concerned, because of the points you. and others, have?made.

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/

Reply via email to