[MD] A formalised Code of Art

[Squonkonguitar at aol.com]

Hi Mark,

I thought I'd sent this before, but obviously it didn't  work, so I'll send 
it again.

Mark 10-10-06: I'm not sure everything does  aim for DQ.

David responds:I'm pretty sure it does.
 
Mark 11-10-06:
Hello David.
This is the first time i've seen this. OK...
Degenerate patterns are falling way from DQ. If this is so you may have to  
reconsider.

Mark 10-10-06: It appears there  may 
be evolutionary  dead ends that are going nowhere having latched in a  
particularly  static fashion.

David responds: Yes, but there is always DQ, it is  simultaneously 
every-where and nowhere.
 
Mark 11-10-06:
That DQ is as you suggest is not the point. The point is how static  patterns 
respond to DQ. I'm suggesting they do not always aim for DQ -  degenerousy 
may be an example. Severe stasis may be said to be a special example  of 
degenerousy.
These patterned responses to DQ stand in relief to the Code of  Art.

Mark 10-10-06: This introduces a potential misunderstanding.
A.  DQ as the goal of cosmological evolution, if you will. And...
B. DQ as the  goal of the code of Art.

David responds:As you know I think A implies  B.
 
Mark 11-10-06:
No, i don't know. I don't recall you stating this in previous  posts.

Mark 10-10-06: Above all, the code of Art is excellence, a term i  think you 
should  
introduce into your formalised  description.

David responds:Excellence to me, is just another word for  quality.  
Everything is quality, even things with a lot of static quality  still have quality.  
The Code of Art on the other hand says that DQ should  be followed.
 
Mark 11-10-06:
Excellence may not be a synonym for Quality. This is not the Metaphysics of  
Excellence.
However, Excellence may be an ontological patterned relationship derrived  
from the Metaphysics of Quality.
In my essay, The edge of Chaos, i suggest excellence is a sq patterned  
relationship which is part of an ontology of excellence.
Do you see what i'm getting at?
The Code of Art produces ontological patterns of excellence.

Mark  10-10-06: It sounds counter intuitive to state that some Inorganic 
patterns  are  
excellent, but if there is one Inorganic pattern which may be  described as  
excellent, it seems to be the Carbon Atom. It's mind  bogglingly excellent in 
 it's 
ability to bond with other  atoms.

David responds: I agree it's excellent/quality.
 
Mark 11-10-06:
I have to disagree. I think Carbon may be described in MoQ terms as  
exceptional relationships between sq patterns.
Carbon, as excellence, is an ontological entity of value. (Coherence)
Gold is an ontological entity of value but it's inert. (Stasis)
Chlorine is an ontological entity of value but it will blow up in your face  
at the drop of a hat. (Choas)

Mark 10-10-06: Carbon has lead to DNA which  has driven Organic evolution for 
Billions of  
years against the forces  of Inorganic matter.
Excellence increases up the levels until our linguistic  patterns no longer  
sound counter intuitive when we contemplate social  and intellectual 
excellence, 
but the excellence we are contemplating may  have had its analogues in  
previous levels.
This view harmonises A  and B.
The particularly static stands in a relationship to the excellent as  chaos  
stands in a relationship to excellence. (But it may be wise to  leave that 
alone 
for the time being!)

David responds: And what do you  mean by this last sentence?  

Cheers,

David.
 
Mark 11-10-06:
"The particularly static stands in a relationship to the excellent as  chaos  
stands in a relationship to excellence." (But it may be wise to  leave that 
alone 
for the time being!)
The edge of Choas and my 2005 Liverpool conference paper cover these.
I've been told in private that these ideas advance the MoQ from Lila and  ZMM.
There is no public recognition of this i am aware of.
However, i am not sure they can be included as official MoQ  terminology.
Maybe they will when allot of people value the concepts and begin  using them?
For my part, an understanding of excellence in MoQ terms utilises stasis  and 
chaos as counterparts - states to be avoided.
So, the Code of Art aims for a sq relationship which is neither static or  
chaotic. I call this relationship Coherence.