Dan: > There is nothing wrong with saying the city of Los Angeles experiences > an earthquake. We use the term experience in various ways. But when it > comes to the MOQ we should strive to be as precise as possible.
Craig [previously]: > So are you saying that when the city of Los Angeles experiences > an earthquake, it doesn't do so in the precise MoQ sense? Dan: > The term 'but' acts to negate the previous sentence. Craig [previously]: > So you're denying that previous sentence--you're denying that "We use the > term 'experience' in various ways". Dan: > No, Craig. I said the term 'but' negates the previous sentence. But "We use the term 'experience' in various ways" is the previous sentence, that you're negating. Dan: > The city of Los Angeles isn't a sentient being and so cannot respond to > Dynamic Quality as per the MOQ. Craig [previously]: > Do you have any support for the view that anything other than "a sentient > being...cannot respond > to Dynamic Quality as per the MOQ"? Dan: > Well, yes. Check out Lila. Only a living being can respond to Dynamic > Quality. You'll have to find the quote yourself though. As I thought, a total fabrication. See Pirsig on iron filings valuing movement towards a magnet. A human responds to DQ by jumping off the hot stove. What about a pat of butter? It doesn't jump off, of course, but it does melt. Consider these possibilities: 1) the butter is a sentient being responding to Dynamic Quality 2) the butter is not a sentient being, but not only sentient beings respond to Dynamic Quality 3) the butter, searching its memory, is reponding to sq Craig 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
