At 11:20 AM 3/10/2007, you wrote: >Thanks again Arlo. > > > I think I'd say "betterness", or Quality, is pursued on all MOQ levels. > > Sometimes these levels conflict in value. > >Yes. But there is clearly much disagreement, at least at moq.org, about >these inter-level conflicts and their meaning. > >I wonder whether what attracts people to the MOQ is its explanation >why things interact they way they do - always driven by a move toward >betterness - and its silence on the meaning of the interactions, i.e., they >can mean everything and they can mean nothing. It seems to me their >meaning is dependent on the observer's perspective on the observed and >in how they allow themselves to be affected by their observations and >interactions. >
Hi Arlo & Kevin, Hmmm. I think Quality (a 'better' word) is amoral. And rather than a drive towards "betterness", a drive towards Quality is a drive towards the amoral, dynamic Quality. Do you disagree with this statement? m 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/
