Hi Ron, Yes, in a nutshell I suppose. The devil is in the details. Still looking for the chooser. I don't think I have the appropriate mirror, yet. I can describe my reasons in a variety of ways, but all are self referential. No ultimate explanation is apparent yet. MoQ may provide a path.
Thanks for the response. Mark On Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 9:01 AM, X Acto <[email protected]> wrote: > Thank you Mark, > > It's not about criticism, I think it is interesting that you require > an adequate explanation of "chooser" to gain a better > explanation for your reasons. > > You comment that you value "objective" betterness > because it is easier for you to explain. > A betterness generated by agreement. > > Both are based on direction, progression, and harmony, aestetic. > > Thank you for being brave enough to air your reasons. > -Ron > > > > > > ----- Original Message ---- > From: 118 <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Sat, October 30, 2010 11:44:32 AM > Subject: Re: [MD] BeTteR-neSs (undefined or otherwise) > > Hi Xacto, > > At the expense of being criticized, I will answer. > > I would divide betterness into two categories, the subjective and the > objective. I would also describe betterness as a trend which is marked by > events or temporary ends along the way. > > My subjective betterness is a function of all input to that point, and the > arrival at a conclusion which seems most meaningful or most encompassing. > I > choose it because it is better. I am not sure how much control I have over > that choice, because I am not quite sure where the "chooser" lies, but I am > certainly aware of an opinion. > > I can see the objective betterness in hindsight much more easily. However, > if I try to predict its direction, I would have to invoke the notion of > harmony. Each level seems to display harmony of its own, that is its own > set of self referential rules. Certainly a harmony of the intellectual > level would be based on tried and true concepts, or at least methods for > achieving such concepts. Such manipulation of abstract things is difficult > to encompass since it requires manipulation in itself. But, if the methods > for such manipulation are gravitated towards by many, then it would be > betterness. Such betterness may be displayed differently as it progresses, > but it is the direction that matters. Congealment of an intellectual level > perhaps leads to the next, if such a thing exists. Such direction is also > one of betterness. So, to conclude, harmony (and not in this feel good or > religious sort of way, but more as a scientific interpretation), if that > makes any sense. > > Open to criticism and questioning of course, or to dismissal, all the same > to me. > > Cheers, > Mark > > On Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 7:34 AM, X Acto <[email protected]> wrote: > > > All, > > > > What is betterness? what does it mean to you? > > > > RMP states there are four kinds of betterness. > > > > Which of those four do you value the most? > > > > > > > > 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 > > > 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 > > > > > 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 > 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
