[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.
[Craig]
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.
Marsha:
Just asking? I was going to stick to saying that
quality/value/experience/reality are synonyms, but...
I still think the best understanding of REALITY (QUALITY) is found in Lila's
words: "...I'm whatever your questions turn me into. You don't see that. It's
your questions that make me who I am. If you think I'm an angel then that's
what I am. If you think I'm a whore then that's what I am. I'm whatever you
think. And if you change your mind about me then I change too. So whatever
Richard tells you, it's true. There's no way he can lie about me." -
Reality (Quality) is whatever you think it is, there's no way you can lie about
it, and if you change your understanding of reality (quality), then reality
(quality) changes too.
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/
