Hi Marsha, What do you mean by processes? As a scientist I have a fixed awareness of such a thing. Are you speaking of cause-effect happenings? If so this would cycle us back to the determined outcome of an original idea from the begining of time. How does free will come into being, assuming you believe in such a thing?
If static patterns = processes, how do you differentiate sq from DQ, as is prescribed by MoQ? Does cause-effect happen outside of DQ? If so, how does DQ interact with sq? Is DQ absent of any process, even the indefinable type? What is it about a pattern that fundamentally makes it distinct from DQ? I am of course assuming you are defining static patterns of value to differentiate them from something else. And that you do not make the assumption that DQ has the same presentation properties as sq. I understand that DQ cannot be said to be anything since it exists before that. However, its effects can be seen through sq. If a pattern depends on other patterns, how does this help us with MoQ? For example, what is it about stating that everything is patterns, as opposed to presenting it another way, help to explain MoQ? If I say that cheese depends on its being cheese, I really have not said much. How else can you link to your pattern idea to the fundamentals of MoQ? Here, I am assuming that your post is for the purposes of intellectual discussion. Faithfully yours, Mark On 2/16/12, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: > > Greetings, > > I believe my use of relative can best be understood by presenting my > definition of static patterns of value: > > To me, static patterns of value are processes, conditionally co-dependent, > impermanent, ever-changing and conceptualized, that pragmatically tend to > persist and change within a stable, predictable pattern. Within the MoQ, > these patterns are morally categorized into a four-level, evolutionary, > hierarchical structure: inorganic, biological, social and intellectual. > Static quality exists in stable patterns relative to other patterns: > patterns depend upon ( exist relative to) innumerable causes and conditions > (patterns), depend upon (exist relative to) parts and the collection of > parts (patterns), depend upon (exist relative to) conceptual designation > (patterns). Patterns have no independent, inherent existence. Further, > these patterns pragmatically exist relative to an individual's static > pattern of life history. > > Marsha: > And as I explained to David when I answered 'yes' to his asking if I thought > all patterns were relative. I think all patterns exist dependent upon > (relative to) other patterns, AND I think some patterns are better than > others. > > > > 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
