At 08:40 AM 3/9/2007, Arlo wrote: >I think this may have been the issue Marsha had with regard to my using >"betterness" than "Quality". I don't see any difference between >these terms. If >something moves because of Quality, it moves because of "betterness". The >betterness/value/Quality that causes those gas particles to diffuse is >different than the betterness/value/Quality that makes a person find greater >value in keeping those particles apart.
Hi Arlo, The "betterness" term makes me uncomfortable. It remind me of the water analogy, "if everything is water, and there is nothing that is not water, then there is no meaning to water, for there is no way of distinguishing a duality or difference between water and nonwater." So if everything is evaluated as "betterness", what does it mean... Am I picking nits? Quality is the less confusing word. It can be high quality or low quality. Can you imagine low "betterness"? 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.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
