Hi Dan, It is futile. She retorts with the one-lined parakeet phrases. I do not think there is much going on there, and certainly nothing to educate. Cheers, Mark
On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 11:12 PM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > On Mar 11, 2012, at 1:18 AM, Dan Glover <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hello everyone >> >> On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 8:33 PM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> >>> Hi Dan, >>> >>> On Mar 10, 2012, at 8:32 PM, Dan Glover <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Hello everyone >>>> >>>> On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 2:13 AM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hello Dan, >>>>> >>>>> I think it best to consider static patterns of value from two different >>>>> points-of-view. The first would be the nature of all patterns: >>>>> conditionally co-dependent, impermanent, ever-changing and >>>>> conceptualized. The process of conceptualization would pertain to all >>>>> patterns (ideas/language). >>>> >>>> Dan: >>>> Are you saying these patterns exist in and of themselves? >>> >>> Marsha: >>> Not at all, I am not saying that patterns exist in and of themselves. I >>> was suggesting that all patterns (inorganic, biological, social & >>> intellectual) have an interdependent relationship with the process of >>> conceptualization. >> >> Dan: >> Why isn't this a case of mistaking the finger for the moon at which it >> is pointing? > > Marsha: > Why would it be mistaking the finger for the moon? Can patterns ever > represent more than pointing? I'd answer no. > > >>> Dan: >>>> If so, then >>>> I disagree. I think they are provisional... they work until something >>>> better comes along. Seeing static patterns of quality as ever-changing >>>> and impermanent seems to go against Robert Pirsig's notion that it is >>>> best to find a balance between Dynamic Quality and static quality. If >>>> static patterns are always changing, how could we hope to form static >>>> latches? Wouldn't any evolutionary advance necessarily fall back? >>> Marsha: >>> A river is ever-changing, but changes within a stable pattern. Skin is >>> ever-changing, but changes within a stable pattern. Static patterns of >>> value pragmatically tend to persist and change within a stable, predictable >>> pattern. >> >> Dan: >> So the patterns are not 'ever-changing' so much as changing within the >> context of stability... or static patterns responding to Dynamic >> Quality... > > Marsha: > No, they are ever-changing, but change within a stable, predictable pattern. > Certainly within the relationship with consciousness (the flow thoughts), > patterns come into existence, transform and pass away in a moment, and a > pattern is never exactly the same as it was even a moment before. > Additionally, patterns would be different for each individual dependent on > their static pattern history. > > >>>>> Marsha: >>>>> The second point-of-view would be categorization by evolutionary function >>>>> into their four-level, hierarchical structure: inorganic, biological, >>>>> social and intellectual. Then intellectual static patterns of value are >>>>> a particular category of pattern that began to emerge with the ancient >>>>> Greeks and functions in a particular manner: mathematics, philosophy, >>>>> science, etc. >>>> >>>> Dan: >>>> Why not simply say intellectual patterns are ideas. It is a good idea >>>> to state inorganic patterns of quality come first. It is a better idea >>>> to say that Quality comes first. >>> >>> Marsha: >>> Because static quality represents all that can be conceptualized and >>> conceptualization includes thoughts and ideas. Static patterns of value >>> from all the levels are conceptually constructed. It is a better idea to >>> say that Quality comes first, but would Quality exist without the >>> relationship with the conceptualization process? >> >> Dan: >> The four levels represent an encyclopedia of reality... a way of >> ordering. They represent more than intellectual patterns of quality. >> Here, you seem to be saying intellectual quality is all there is, but >> this goes against the MOQ. > > Marsha: > I am not saying all patterns are just concepts. I am saying that all > patterns, including inorganic, bioligical and social patterns, have a > relationship with the conceptualization process. Additionally, I am saying > that all patterns can be categorized, or ordered, into the four-level, > hierarchical, evolutionary structure. I agree that all patterns may be > thought to represent an encyclopedia of reality. > > >> Thank you, >> >> Dan > > 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
