Hello Magnus
At 05:38 AM 9/24/2008, you wrote:
Hi Marsha
To me all significance is found in the nature of patterns. And I'm
afraid I am not the one to explain this to you. In some ways, it
does undermine "science" as we "know" it. (I think you can say it
undermines economics too.)
Yes, I agree patterns undermines all sciences. However, since
patterns are the one "thing" that connects all sciences, I think we
can use that connection to somehow find that least common denominator.
I don't know what to say here.
Directly experiencing phenomenon is possible, but requires
awareness which happens seldom. It's mostly the patterns that
cause the confusion. I have come to understand patterns as the
conceptual opposite-from-non-(elephants for example).
I'm not a fan of that opposite-from-non-thingy. I actually don't
understand what it means, or how it explains anything. To me, it's
just a game with words. And the only thing it accomplishes is to
force me to make two successive negations, which just brings me back
to where I was.
Opposite-from-non-entity(phenomenon/concept) to me is a pattern, and
is the same for all patterns. What would the pattern of an elephant
be? It would be all one knows and associates with the name/label
elephant. It would be opposite from everything that is not
elephant. 'Opposite-from-non-' includes everything that is pertinent
concerning elephant but does not wander off to unintended
confusion. It is all general information, but also all specific
information. It is pattern through and through, interconnected and
ever-changing. This pattern may include being embarrassed at missing
the proper spelling of e-l-e-p-h-a-n-t in a third-grade spelling bee.
You see a shape and identify it as 'elephant', and the pattern
representing elephant floods the mind. Seeing becomes
inconsequential (unless, of course, the elephant is charging at
you). It seems so clear to me, I could play mental volleyball with a
pattern, maybe paint one. (Oh-oh!) This direct experience of seeing
this particular 'elephant' also becomes ingested into
elephant-pattern. Elephant pattern is both general and particular
experience.
It's all conceptual. Whether you are a scientist, or a dentist, or
ice cream salesman, it's all conceptual.
There is no elephant other than this conceptual pattern. Or,,, that
which I originally saw was not an 'elephant' or any of its
associations. What a wonder! Least common denominator? Empty of
independent existence!
Phenomenon is there, but not in the patterns. Within the patterns
it is only symbolically represented.
I'd say it's only intellectual patterns that can "symbolically"
represent anything, but I would agree if you used the "statically"
instead. I think your phenomenon is pretty close to Q itself, i.e. a
quality event with DQ influence.
In my mind, ALL patterns are symbolic, static, analogous
representations of conceptual entities. Some whose referent is
phenomenon (inorganic/biological) and some whose referent is purely
conceptual (social/intellectual).
I did read your paper. I do not think that additional levels will
solve the problem. Again, I see the significance in the nature of patterns.
Understanding that nature of patterns changes everything. It
totally changes how one relates. It is betterness.
The additional levels doesn't show your significance, no. But I
think it *does* show, by reasoning about how I found those new
levels, the nature of patterns.
I attempted to read your paper again, but in the first few pages
there is so much reference to "objects" that I get too frustrated. I
just feel even more strongly that the key is understanding the nature
of patterns. Calling them "objects" just doesn't do it.
I must give you much credit for how deeply you must care about the
MOQ to write such a paper. I love you for writing it. I'll try
again to read it when I can more easily convert your "objects" into
my opposite-from-non- patterns.
I love the patterns, though, they are as empty as sky-flowers, but so
very beautiful...
Marsha
.
.
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/
