[Platt] If I could only make you see that when my cat plops down in the sun it does so because of SQ, a static pattern of "it's better here,"...
[Arlo] Static patterns are after the fact. The "it's better moment" is the Dynamic, evolutionary movement of the MOQ. Do you really think you (or someone) could write a formula that would predict with absolute accuracy every movement your cat makes? Sometimes my cat plops in the sun, sometimes it does not, sometimes it chases its tail, sometimes it does not, and throughout it all there is my cat responding to Dynamic Quality, the "it's better here" moment of Dynamic movement. Perhaps now you would answer my question. Could animals ever respond to DQ? And id so, describe for me some way they behaved differently then from the way they respond now? Let's say 10 million years ago, before "people" but with a world crawling with animals, what responded to DQ? Describe for me the difference between then and now with regard to how animals are? What you are doing is conflating responding to DQ on the socio-intellectual levels with responding to DQ in toto. Certainly "man" (by virtue of his being made of social and intellectual patterns, as well as biological and inorganic) has a wider repertoire of response to DQ than your cat. But, again, elevating "man" out from the world as the sole respondent to DQ is not only merely re-entrenching the same S/O dualism, but is indefensible from any evolutionary perspective (when did "cats" lose their ability to respond to DQ? is responding to DQ something that requires uniquely human biology? if so, then did nothing respond to DQ before humans? if they did, how were they able? did they lose this biological feature?) 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/
