[Joe] As far as I know you I admire you very much and I am sorry if I seemed confrontational with ³I disagree!² I feel at an early loss agreeing to disagree. IMO we have a different view of the ³existence² of undefined quality? Is ³existence² a necessary term in discussing ³quality² and in that discussion is ³existence² undefined? I say yes that there are undefined levels in ³existence² which differentiates ³undefined² quality at the individual level. Though defined measurements at the molecular level may not distinguish undefined differences still ³undefined² is a proper way to describe capabilities in a description of levels, e.g. social or intellectual. [Krimel] The feeling of admiration is mutual and I often think you and I do no so much disagree as that we see things very very differently. I tend to see things in terms of the interaction of DQ and SQ. The results are probabilistic. The more static something is the more well defined its probabilities are, the more certainty is there, the more lawful the relationship. The more dynamic something is the less well defined are its probabilities the more uncertain are its outcomes.
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/
