[MD] Patterns

[Magnus Berg]

Hi SA

> SA:  Then redefine reality.  Reality will still be
> here.  Dictionaries full of defines will still be
> here.  How we understand all of this, dictionaries and
> all will be with an moq perception.  This is how the
> moq changes everything, everywhere, for all time.  A
> metaphysics does this.  It's called paradigm shift. 
> The new paradigm, the moq, lets us understand that
> quality has been the decision maker, the reality
> throughout history.  This is how science today can
> understand near the Big Bang, those moments after zero
> but before 1 second of the Big Bang moment.  Quality,
> values, and morals have been here throughout time.  A
> metaphysics will do this to a person.  In a field that
> academically I understand more so than others maybe is
> anthropology.  The European culture was shocked during
> it's years of discovery ca. 1400's A.D. by what they
> called exotic cultures.  'Exotic', these other
> cultures in the world are no more exotic than the
> European culture itself, yet, the Europeans, at the
> time, didn't realize people could live so differently.
>  As other cultures open our minds to other ways of
> life - metaphysics opens our minds to a reality that
> has always been depending on the metaphysics you
> incorporate into your life.  A metaphysics of quality
> says Quality is reality and reality has always been,
> is, and always will be.  Reality goes on and on and we
> can delineate timelines of when this reality began for
> humans and that reality began for humans, but a
> reality one picks to live is the reality one goes with
> and a reality that is quality states no other reality
> than quality.  So, I really don't know what you mean
> by redefining reality.  I do, but I don't.  It seems
> to me reality doesn't need our redefining.  Reality is
> reality and according to the moq reality is quality. 
> If we're just realizing this now, then we just woke up
> to this quality reality now.

I agree with most of this, can't really point at anything I don't agree with.

Reality does not need our redefining. My understanding of metaphysics includes 
the notion that reality has always implicitly "known" how it's constructed and 
how it should behave.

It is only *we* who need to redefine *our* understanding of this reality.

Does that resonate better with your point of view?


> SA:  I find we could use 'thing', 'object', 'pattern',
> or whatever word you want.  It's how you understand
> these concepts.  Thus, why we ask each other 'What do
> you mean?', and 'How do you understand thing or object
> or pattern?' due to we have these inclinations that
> once we find out how the other person is using such
> concepts and understandings such concepts then we'll
> understand more and more how they are living reality.

Exactly, that was what I tried to do. To explain to Marsha what *I* meant (and 
how I think the MoQ means) with 'pattern'.

	Magnus