Ian, I also think the non-affirming negative works for describing static patterns of value.
There's chair and opposite-from-non-chair. Chair represents an instance of chair: the wooden chair you are sitting on, the office chair Dan is sitting on, and the upholstered chair on which I sit; all different, relative and ever-changing These I see as instances of applying bits and pieces of chair-pattern (events) on to the immediate undifferentiated flow, and which becomes a part of the evolving pattern. While opposite-from-non-chair represents the static value pattern: the accumulation of all chair-pattern events. Marsha p.s. This way of looking at patterns is adapted from Buddhist concepts. It may be misrepresenting its original use, but it works for me, at least at the moment it works for me. It seems as clear as can be to me. On Apr 1, 2011, at 4:01 AM, MarshaV wrote: > > Re: sq is not other than DQ > > > I'm no genius, but I understand this statement as a non-affirming negative. > It is inclusive. > > The statement 'a forest is trees' allows for one to say: Yes, and it is > undergrowth, animals and insects too. Where if you state that 'a forest is > not other than trees' there is no allowance in the statement to point to > other additional possibilities. > > > So my statement is: sq is not other than DQ. - The fundamental nature of > sq is DQ. > > > The statement precisely represents my understanding. ___ 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
