Mark, I'm still waiting for you to answer my questions, but thanks for more of your automatic writing....
Marsha On Oct 27, 2011, at 4:41 PM, 118 wrote: > Hi Marsha, > Wow, that is a mouthful, thanks for that. I guess it takes a static bundle > of words to present the static. > > If your ever changing is constant, then such a description never changes. So > in term of change, your static never changes, which I guess is why you > describe it as static. A few posts ago I asked you what this change is in > reference to. That is, your processes must change according to something > else. Otherwise your ever changing has no meaning. If I say I am moving > this must be in reference to something else. > > Does the static change with reference to the dynamic? This would be an > interesting idea to explore. I am looking for metaphors which can promote > the interaction between DQ and sq. any ideas? > > Since you seem to have read The Black Swan, you can appreciate that > -predictability only works in hindsight. So your static corresponds to > coyote John's notion of The Past, and DQ being the Future. This would mean > that we live between sq and DQ, or, in the present. What do you think? > > > > > Mark > > On Oct 27, 2011, at 11:22 AM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> Actually, Mark, here is my definition of static patterns of value: >> >> Static patterns of value are processes: ever-changing, conditionally >> co-dependent, impermanent and conceptualized. Ever-changing processes that >> pragmatically tend to persist and change within a stable, predictable >> pattern. These patterns are categorized into an evolutionary, hierarchical >> structure consisting of four discrete levels: inorganic, biological, social >> and intellectual. >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> Marsha >> >> >> >> On Oct 27, 2011, at 1:09 PM, MarshaV wrote: >> >>> >>> Hi Mark, >>> >>> I consider static patterns of value from two different points of view. One >>> would be the nature of ALL patterns: interdependent, impermanent, >>> ever-changing and conceptualized. A second would be by categorization >>> according to their evolutionary function: inorganic, biological, social >>> and intellectual. >>> >>> >>> Thank you. >>> >>> Marsha >>> >>> >> >> ___ >> >> >> 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
