[MD] Does Quality exist?

[MarshaV]

At 03:18 PM 12/4/2007, you wrote:
>
>In a message dated 12/4/2007 3:07:07 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
>moq_discuss-request at lists.moqtalk.org writes:
>
>It's a  playground of value.  Don't you realized what that means?   Be
>aware and value what is good.
>
>
>
>Ok, say I think a certain Mozart symphony has Quality, i.e., it  reveals
>quality to me.  All of my feelings and instincts tell me that it is  a "good"
>piece of music.  One day I play it ten times (!) and by the end,  I'm so
>thoroughly sick of the piece that I probably won't dig it out for 
>another  year.  Have
>I tired of "quality?"  If it's just my personal reaction,  then surely I
>should be able to overcome my weariness with the work, 
>since  recognizing Quality
>is all about letting go of one's preconceived notions.
>

Greetings again Redsky,

When the Mozart symphony is good, listen to it.  When you're tired of 
listening to it, stop listening.  Quality (static/Dynamic) is a 
process.  It changes.

>
>
>dmb  says:
>As we saw in the quote Bo posted, the thought experiment, removing  Quality
>to see how the world would be effected, results in the loss of 
>the  fine arts.
>We'd still be able to distinquish a wall from a painting, but not 
>a  good wall
>from a bad wall or a good painting from a bad one. In such a world  we'd
>probably still have walls but the loss of quality would make the arts  into a
>pointless exercise in changing a thing's shape for no reason at all.  Walls
>function as a barrier to the outside but art's function is 
>predicated on  a sense of
>quality such that they couldn't function without it. Without  quality in the
>world, there'd be no reason NOT to eat the same dry, tasteless  food pellets
>at every meal - like a dog.
>
>Why would we be able to distinguish a wall and a painting but not two
>paintings?  I thought Quality was the ability to distinguish  items.

Without quality (value) there would be no recognition of inside or 
outside, so there would be no walls.

Marsha