David, You state it well. And here it is presented by a Buddhist scholar. It's more obscure, but saying something similar.
"The “arising of the world” thus has two dimensions, one more or less synchronic, the other diachronic, both of which follow the same general pattern of arising. The concomitance of subject and object gives rise, from moment to moment, to forms of cognitive awareness that are strongly determined by the specific structures of an organism’s faculties—and this constitutes the arising of that organism’s “world,” its current cognitive domain. Similarly, the recurrent patterns of interaction between a species and its relevant environment [Quality(Dynamic/static)] give rise, over the long-run, to species-specific forms of cognitive awareness that are strongly determined by the evolved structure of that species’ faculties—and this constitutes the evolution, the long-term arising, of that species’ “world,” its species-specific cognitive domain. We will discuss the relationship between these two shortly." (The Co-arising of Self, Object, World and Society. W. Waldron. 2004), a pdf file Marsha On Mar 7, 2013, at 5:47 PM, "David Morey" <[email protected]> wrote: > > dmb says: > > And how can you fail to see the contradiction in that phrase? How can anyone > fail to see that the phrase is nonsense? It is an absurdly impossible idea. > How can anything be stable and constantly changing at the same time? It > simply makes no sense. > > DM: Well an eddy in a stream for example, or the human body that exchanges > chemicals with its environment all the time, or atoms that exchange > electrons all the time, or s stone sitting on a rock, but racing through > space on a planet and through the dimension of time. I mean everything is > changing all the time, and yet there are islands of stability, if you look at > things synchrionically, but the diachronic is always there. Not too hard > to grasp really, if you have done any science! -a fairly positive and > consistent approach to understanding how processes really work. The great > things about SQ, science, maths, quantity rather than quality, is that you > can focus on parts rather than wholes and parts can be seen as stable, > the big picture, the long view is that everything is changing, the cosmos of > one hell of a dangerous flux, the stability is finite, temporary and just > found in little islands. Due to DQ there is change, SQ emerges, but SQ also > certainly dis-emerges, such is DQ giver and taker of SQ. > 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
