>> We can't intellectually define which are the good humans and which are the bad. Many political systems have tried, all have failed.
mr carl, feel free to learn that the capitalist system you live in, while economic in nature, actually has an entire political system implicit in its ongoing functioning, and it has not failed. The implied political system values ownership and actually favors the rights of owners (as in owners of capital), thats why the non owners hate the distortions this reality you deny creates in the way the govt spends money. Why arent humans whose ability to capture DQ more easily, due to the removal of dogmas and the common compulsive urge to stereotype, and generate higher Quality Intellectual Patterns defined as more good? >> [Horse]..limiting resources to less enhanced humans based on technological enhancements would be wrong. Thank you for the insight Horse. I also feel that it's wrong, but when you limit resources to patterns that hold back an entire system from capturing more DQ, i believe the MoQ allows that. As in kill animals so as not to starve if you are human. I dont see any point in the original MoQ where this pursuit of more autonomous patterns that can latch onto higher forms of Q via "DQ capture" (i dont know the preferred terminology for how static patterns merge or evolve towards higher Q static patterns). Marsha, thank you for the nice gift. I enjoy the band, but the video brought it to new high :) Regards, tudor 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/md/archives.html
