Hi guys,
Rog thanks for your summary and for going back to the definitions. I think it's an
important
step we should do more often to avoid confusion.
It's way past my bedtime however and I won't answer exactly to all the questions. I
already
read the other posts on this and I saw that the 'definitions' are not far apart, but I
think it's
better when you summarize the bunch, seeing that you started it :-).
I only want to add to the SQ definition because it's definition should be more than
what it's not
or what it is formed by.
> Q3) Define sq, in terms of the above two def's if possible
(Just like David said) Static Quality is the stable form of Quality, also called a
pattern.
Stable is defined as able to exist longer in time, making Static Quality occur in a
continuum of
shorter and longer existing patterns
> Q5) Explain what "all is evolving toward" in your preceding terms
I see we've got the most problems here. I still want to respond to David's good post
(17/3/99) in which
the issue becomes more clear that the 'forming' DQ is difficult to coincide with the
DQ that everything
is evolving towards.
I agree with Horse and Magnus that it's better to say that all is evolving away from
the static. From the above
definition that means that static patterns, though getting more and more complex are
also getting less and
less stable, as in being able to repeat themselves longer in time.
Teleological ontology should not necessarily imply a goal or a kind of purpose (maybe
this is the big mistake
many philosophers make).
Walter
MOQ Homepage - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
