[MD] Can DQ be Bad?

[Lord Arioch]

Mortal Fool,
let it be writ
Chaos is your master
naught else

Hell awaits
thine
worship at the temple
of law

fangs dripping


the idols of heaven

are forged by the smythes

of Hell



~^~









 


----- Original Message ----
From: Christoffer Ivarsson <IvarssonChristoffer at hotmail.com>
To: moq_discuss at lists.moqtalk.org
Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 10:38:33 AM
Subject: Re: [MD] Can DQ be Bad?

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"?


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.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/