On May 13, 2011, at 1:09 AM, Dan Glover wrote: > Hello everyone > > On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 1:11 PM, david buchanan <[email protected]> > wrote: >> >> dmb says: >> Well, I suppose it's futile to try to talk sense with a person with thinks >> static patterns of quality are both ever-changing AND a kind of prison. It's >> a cage made of clouds, apparently. It's like trying to discuss water with >> someone who thinks ice is hot and steamy. Even Sarah Palin would blush at >> this level of incoherence. >> >> In the MOQ, static patterns are not a prison. They are the world as we know >> it, arranged in an evolutionary moral hierarchy. They are static patterns of >> VALUE, of QUALITY. >> Marsha had said:I not only agree with Mark that language is a kind of >> prison, but I also think patterns are a kind of prison."To the extent that >> one's behavior is controlled by static patterns of quality it is without >> choice. But to the extent that one follows Dynamic Quality, which is >> undefinable, one's behavior is free." [LILA} > > Dan: > I don't think it's right to say patterns are a kind of prison, or > language for that matter. Language and patterns are useful for > rationally sharing our sense of experience. I think the above quote is > being taken out of context.
Marsha: I do agree that language and patterns are useful for all sorts of reasons. I think I've said this many times. I'm a conventional woman and find them very useful.. If 'prison' is too strong a word for you, perhaps 'cage' would be a better choice? I meant 'prison' in the sense of 'constraint.' But maybe you can find a word you like better. ___ 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
