To the list: Thank you for having this website. I didn't know who to talk to concerning all of this. My name is Matt Coughlan and I'll randomly get around to doing a bio someday. Here are some of the issues I would like to bring up: 1) Defining what the next level of static evolution is equivalent to being a three-dimensional object asking what it's like being a four dimensional object. We are in the intellectual paradigm right now. that's why we can't guess what the next stage is. "Guess" is an intellectual word. "Word" is intellectual. All of THIS is intellectual. 2) Is it possible to build the Static Paradigm with other pieces? Namely, does it have to follow thus: Inorganic, Organic, Social, Intellectual? Can it start with Inorganic and lead to Goobletrang? And then to Fyderwaulk? (I realize that this is just intellectual masterbation. It's not very useful. Sorry.) 3) I find it extremely cool that Static/Dynamic is equivalent to Order/Chaos and J/P in Keirsey's temperment sorter (Myer's-Briggs/Jung theory). It's a good use of the intellectual knife. 4) MOQ is a nifty tool. It has loopholes, like every Static paradigm, including Newton's laws, general relativity, quantum physics--because Dynamic Quality has already started to leave it behind. An abstract tool is like a hammer. Hammers have already been made obsolete by screws and then by screwguns. Just like how Newton's laws have been made obsolete, though they still function. But it is a TOOL. Although abstract, it remains a tool. It's only as good as how USEFUL it is. 5) I must admit, though, it's the best tool I've seen in a long time. And extremely useful. Sincerely, Matt Coughlan ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/ MD Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at: http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
