[MD] Can DQ be Bad?

[Christoffer Ivarsson]

I wholeheartedly disagree.

First of, DQ is constant and the dynamic aspect occurs when static patterns 
move toward/perceive/word that fit's a new aspect of Quality. Thus DQ is 
never bad, but if the movement towards new Quality understanding/being/word 
that fits makes the static pattern too unstable "it" is to "blame".

And the hot stove thing - that is bad biological quality isn't it? Granted 
it can be Dynamic if a biological being has never encountered a hot stove 
before, and then it is a new Quality understanding, but that understanding 
is incorporated into the understanding of Good and Bad of the biological 
level.

//Chris

> dmb said:
> Yes, Krimel, DQ has a negative face. Chaos and confusion and degeneracy
> ensues when things are too dynamic.
>
> Krimel replied:
> At last, perhaps the MoQ can move forward.
>
> dmb replies to the reply:
> The MOQ can move forward? This negative aspect of DQ has been part of the
> MOQ since the day it was published. Sitting on hot stoves is no picnic, 
> for
> example.
>
> [Krimel]
> Unbelievably, dmb and I seem to have found some common ground. Before it
> turns to quicksand, who will join us in admitting that DQ is not always
> "Good" or even "good"?