[Ham] "your favorite author sees existents (natural phenomena) as fixed "patterns" that are made "dynamic" by DQ. Obviously, I do not share this view."
"In common parlance, that which changes or is in in transition is "dynamic". That which is constant and immutable is "static". Poetic metaphors and euphemisims not accepted." Does this at least convince you of the logic of my position? [Ron] Interesting, I did not perceive Pirsig as stating this in his ontology. I had the impression that Pirsig was stating that all existence is dynamic. What we perceive as physical reality are the more static patterns of dynamic quality (that which changes slower and may be percieved) for there are no true constants and thus there is nothing which is immutable or absolute. I think you are interpreting MOQ. DQ and SQ dualisticly. Your logic and your ontology seems of a dualistic nature for it rests on the tension of opposites. When MOQ is interpretd in this light it does not work logically by those standards. My impression was that RMP was dropping opposites for patterns of value. 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/ 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/
