I wholeheartedly disagree.
First of, DQ is constant and the dynamic aspect occurs when static patterns
move toward/perceive/word that fit's a new aspect of Quality. Thus DQ is
never bad, but if the movement towards new Quality understanding/being/word
that fits makes the static pattern too unstable "it" is to "blame".
And the hot stove thing - that is bad biological quality isn't it? Granted
it can be Dynamic if a biological being has never encountered a hot stove
before, and then it is a new Quality understanding, but that understanding
is incorporated into the understanding of Good and Bad of the biological
level.
//Chris
dmb said:
Yes, Krimel, DQ has a negative face. Chaos and confusion and degeneracy
ensues when things are too dynamic.
Krimel replied:
At last, perhaps the MoQ can move forward.
dmb replies to the reply:
The MOQ can move forward? This negative aspect of DQ has been part of the
MOQ since the day it was published. Sitting on hot stoves is no picnic,
for
example.
[Krimel]
Unbelievably, dmb and I seem to have found some common ground. Before it
turns to quicksand, who will join us in admitting that DQ is not always
"Good" or even "good"?
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/
