Honestly, i'm really not being facetious. But Wim, is this your offering for a topic? If not, i think you should ask it as your suggestion (whether we'll acutally 'obey' the findings/opinions is another topic i guess -hehe). If so it has my vote.
But my own suggestion: Is the romantic/classic split from the ZMM model (classic/romantic) really separate from the MoQ? Or are these just different ways of cutting up the same pie? For example, both romantic and classic mindsets have dynamic (new revolutions, innovations and discoveries) and static (technical and logical 'conclusions', and masters without new insights) polarities. Also, each mindset deals with reality and perception just as the MoQ hierarchy does. So in what way does the MoQ go beyond, incorporate and/or dismantle the romantic/classic division? Or, How does the MoQ and ZMM model relate to each other in action/method? I think that the MoQ is a different dimensional view of the same territory. If we looked at the hierarchy (inorganic . . . intellectual) in an up-down manner and the static-dynamic as left-right columns, then we can use the romatic-classic split in the dimension of depth. Amilcar Dance 'til your knees hurt Giggle 'til you're gone Love with abandon Do MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_focus/ MF Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from moq_focus follow the instructions at: http://www.moq.org/mf/subscribe.html
