[Arlo] > My take on the MOQ is that Quality is fundamental, and that patterns only emerge as a response to this foundation.
[Marsha] > Dyanmic and static quality, or as I like to say, > unpatterned experience and patterned experience. Do we need to reconcile these 2 views? Do patterns emerge as a response to quality or are they identical to it? Why do we use 2 different words: quality & experience? Is it because "high & low quality experience" sounds OK, but "high & low quality quality" sounds weird? Is it "to be is to experience" or "to be is to be experienced"? Could there be something that experiences but is not experienced (= ghosts)? Could there be something that is experienced but does not experience (= zombies)? If quality is undifferentiated, could there be different ways to respond to it? Just asking. Craig 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/
