Hi again Dan On 02/11/2010 22:28, Dan Glover wrote:
Two comments stand out... we both static quality and Dynamic Quality to survive, and blind obedience to either is futile. Rather than trying to define Dynamic Quality as what it is, we need to look at what it is not. Great points to keep in mind.
There was a great analogy to DQ that I picked up in a book I read over the summer - unfortunately I can't remember the book or the author! Might've been Dennett. The analogy was one of a universal library where every possible combination of every character (in English) existed separately in, what would amount to, an infinite number of books. Countless copies of Lila exist where there is maybe one character or word different to the copies that most of us possess. Similarly with every other book in existence already and an infinite number that have never existed. Most of theses books will be garbage and make no sense whatsoever - they're just a jumble of characters in no particular order. The only way we know if they make any sense is if we read them. Which ones have value and which don't? We don't know until we've read them.
As an analogy this made a lot of sense to me. Horse -- "Without music to decorate it, time is just a bunch of boring production deadlines or dates by which bills must be paid." — Frank Zappa 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
