dmb, I acknowledge the discrepancy between concepts and reality, but as long as you misrepresent my statements, I have no respect for your babble.
My explanation/definition of static patterns of value: Static patterns of value are repetitive processes (multiple events), conditionally co-dependent, impermanent and ever-changing, 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 have no independent, inherent existence. On Apr 29, 2013, at 3:20 PM, david buchanan <[email protected]> wrote: > dmb says: > ... By the same token we can say static patterns are NOT ever-changing in the > same way that cold is not hot or the same way that old is not young. The > meaning of the terms is defined, in part, this logical opposition. The > primary empirical reality, DQ, or reality itself is ever-changing. Seems to me that Dynamic Quality is indivisible, without boundaries, unpatterned; what's going to change? "Change is probably the first concept emerging from this Dynamic experience..." (RMP, 'LILA's Child', Annotation 57) 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
