Andre, This seems an interesting way to change the subject of free-will & determinism without dmb conceding to Steve's argument.
Marsha On Jul 19, 2011, at 3:37 AM, Andre Broersen wrote: > Andre to Dave: > Just another insert Dave. When I talked about "Leave it in the weather for a > number of years and yeah, the changes are noticeable because dynamic > influences occur at subatomic levels all the time. But for pragmatic reasons > the notion of using 'ever changing' when you mean 'stable' or 'static' is > confusing because misleading"... I should also have added the 'forces' of > regeneration, the stabilizing quality to latch the advances made. It are > these repeated patterns that make them stable, recognizable. > > To add to the confusion Marsha has gotten herself into is that she now denies > DQ as being change. She says: "I consider DQ to be indeterminate - > unknowable, undefinable, and undividable - unpatterned". > > Now, on its own this is a bit more like it. BUT she still considers DQ=sq and > sq=DQ. She has said so repeatedly. She considers herself to be an ever > changing pattern of...within a stable whatever. You work it out Dave because > I can't anymore. > > I agree with dmb: "sigh". ___ 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
