[MD] until death do us part

[John Carl]

Ah but Ian,

Pairs set up that ol' pendulum swinging, back and forth, back and forth,
higher and higher, harder and harder.  Dyadic relations  inherently tend
toward destruction.

Whereas the triadic is inherently stable - a tripod vs the motorcycle, for
instance.  And don't even get me started on unicycles!

With three or more, you have an interpreter.  Even Bo pleads to Krimel to be
an umpire!  Imagine that.

So what you call chaos, I call the dynamic possibility of freedom.  What you
call stable, I call static cling.

Long reign the threesome!





On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 7:39 AM, Ian Glendinning
<ian.glendinning at gmail.com>wrote:

> To John the enthusiast of group things, from Ian the enthusiast of
> paired things.
>
> I call this the three-body-problem - after Newton. Pairs work because
> they are (sufficiently) predictable .... three or more, chaos.
> Workable groups are made of pairs of pairs of pairs of ...
>
> Jerry Garcia and Neal Cassady
> Jerry Garcia and The Grateful Dead
> Man and wife.
> Man and mistress
> Wife and lover
> Child and sibling
> Child and parent
>
> Subjects and objects do have value.
>
> Easier to chew on ?
> Ian
>
> On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 3:20 PM, John Carl <ridgecoyote at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Good Morning, Margaret, your quote coincides precisely with a little
> snippet
> > I just read, that seems right on the point:
> >
> >>
> >> Bruce Lee said in "The Tao of Jeet Kune Do":
> >> "To know oneself is to study oneself in action with another person."
> >>
> >> And you sure can learn alot in a relationship whether or not it
> >> involves the contract of marriage!
> >>
> >>
> > The snippet I read was from the introduction to a book called "On the
> Bus",
> > a retrospective of the great bus Further and the Merry Pranksters and
> about
> > an episode where a relationship changed the perspective of one person
> > contemplating individuality vs. community who claimed,  "Neal Cassady
> > changed my life"
> >
> > "He was the mellow Neal, just a guy, just like us.  But there was a
> > mysterious thing there too. I had the feeling that I was involved in a
> > lesson...
> >
> > Neal represented a model to me of how far you could take it in an
> individual
> > way, in the sense that you weren't going to have a work, you were going
> to
> > be the work.  Work in real time, which is a lot like musician's work.
> >
> > I was oscillating at the time.  I had originally been an art student and
> was
> > wavering between one-man-one-work or being involved in something that was
> > dynamic and ongoing and didn't necessarily stay any one way-- and, also,
> > something in which you weren't the only contributing factor.
> >
> > I decided to go with what was dynamic and with what more than one mind
> was
> > involved with.
> >
> > The decision I came to was to be involved in a group thing, namely the
> > Grateful Dead, and I'm still involved with it."
> >
> > Jerry Garcia
> >
> > So back to the original question Marsha had, about MoQ reasons for
> marriage,
> > here's one to chew on.  Living by our own thinking is too static.
> >
> > John the enthusiast of "group things"
> > 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/md/archives.html
> >
> 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/md/archives.html
>