> MP: > But that is still not measuring *Quality.* Its measuring the > *chances*, the > *likelihood*, the *probability* of an experience having or resulting in > Quality. Its > not measuring the Quality of the results. Its not saying "this is > more Quality than another." > > [Krimel] > Quality is a perception. It is a synthesis or a summation of > experience plus an evaluation.
MP: Quality is affirmed through perception, it is experienced through perception, but to say it *is* perception? I have to disagree based on what I have gathered about it. Perception is a biological process. One perhaps patterned on Quality, but not Quality itself. [Krimel Please note I said Quality is "a" perception. Perception is not a wholly biological process. It is the interaction of biology with the environment and recollections of the past. All perception is illusion. It is the summation of various processes including sensation, memory, emotion, and accumulated cognitive structures (schemas and scripts). MP: It also IMO does not in any way incorporate or contain "evaluation." Evaluation is an intellectual operation, in the realm of concepts. Quality is pre-conceptual. [Krimel] Almost all of the sensory pathways lead directly to the thalamus in the midbrain. From there they are routed to other areas of the brain for processing. The amygdala is one of the first stops and it basically sums the data present and pronounces it good or bad in emotional terms. All of this is prior to conception or intellectual evaluation. 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/
