[Willblake2 to John] Because Quality has direction, that is it is leading evolution, it would seem to me that it is differentiated. It creates hierarchies of SQ/DQ. At one point,I asked if it was similar to the Tao, which in my impression is undifferentiated.
The Tao is simply creative in a circular manner, that is, not directional. [Krimel] This is one of the ideas that has basically run the MoQ into a ditch. Evolution is the end result of massively numerous random walks. Such that we can look back, see where we have been and call it "good". But it tells us Very little about the future other than that we have an almost unfettered ability to look back at the past and call it "good". Willblake2 Sounds like you are thinking a little like me about evolution. I'm not sure how random these walks are, since they are under immense control, both from the inside and from the outside. The rules that evolution has to abide by are numerous. Random would imply a certain amount of freedom to go any which way. It is true that evolution only has hindsight, kind of like the stock market, or a football game, however both those contain rules. Quality would appear to have rules, if I understand it correctly. It is these rules which create the distinct hierarchies mentioned in Lila. Something that is undifferentiated has no focus. [Krimel] I don't think there really is or could be, anything like: pure randomness. In fact I think that if there actually is the possibility of "pure randomness;" then the probability of something exactly like "this" happening right "now" actually turns out to be better than expected. At least, I think that was the case Douglas Adams made for the creation of the infinite improbability drive. Without "pure randomness" we are still back in the same old crap shoot: betting baby's new shoes on a rush of dopamine. But, I totally agree, there are always "degrees of freedom" and I mean that in the sense of: STA-101; which, for reasons I'd rather not go into, I took twice. [Willblake2] If both the Tao and Quality are considered the underlying fabric of reality. Quality is continually creating a better tapestry. The Tao is creating the same tapestry over and over again. [Krimel] I think the Tao is entirely Heraclytian. The epicycles of light and dark and heat and warmth are patterns so static that every form of life on this planet accommodated itself to them millions of years ago. Every cycle of warp and weft adds to or diminishes, the Quality of the larger tapestry. Every form of repetition implies some form of variation. [Willblake2] I had another question that I asked, and that was: was Quality monotheistic or pluralistic. Is it the same as Brahman, or is it a guiding force interacting? [Krimel] I think both the MoQ and Taoism are forms of pantheistic monism. But that's just me. Willblake2 That works for me. One has a finger pointing somewhere, the other has no finger at all, just a beating heart. [Krimel] Damn, "I" wish "I" had said that. Maybe "we" just did. 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/
