[SA previously]
> > And this is why literalism is a barrier to
> >understanding a reality that includes that which is
ineffable.
[Marsha]
> Would you say that ambiguousness is an advantage to
understanding > a reality that includes that which is
ineffable?
Ambiguous doesn't understand anything, thus,
static quality. Static quality is stable enough to
get an understanding across, with the levels and such,
but these levels are not totally distinct due to there
growth, non-deadness, and therefore openness to dq.
Therefore when you say, "Exactly!" but then say your
only kidding about literalism being a barrier it
doesn't make sense. My previous quote above is
plain-spoken. Literalism in SOM is too rigid and
distinct. It is too black and white. To be literal
in SOM is different than being literal in MOQ.
Literal in MoQ is plain-spoken using static patterns
of value, but it is understood that the big picture
includes dynamic quality.
This is how I see this.
thunderstorm!!!!!!! yeah!
SA
____________________________________________________________________________________
Sick sense of humor? Visit Yahoo! TV's
Comedy with an Edge to see what's on, when.
http://tv.yahoo.com/collections/222
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/
