[MD] British Emergentism

[craigerb at comcast.net]

[Arlo] 
> My take on the MOQ is that Quality is fundamental, and that 
patterns only emerge as a response to this foundation. 





[Marsha] 
> Dyanmic and static quality, or as I like to say, 
> unpatterned experience and patterned experience. 



Do we need to reconcile these 2 views? 

Do patterns emerge as a response to quality 

or are they identical to it? 

Why do we use 2 different words: quality & experience? 

Is it because "high & low quality experience" sounds OK, 
but "high & low quality quality" sounds weird? 
Is it  "to be is to experience" 
or "to be is to be experienced"? 

Could there be something that experiences 
but is not experienced (= ghosts)? 

Could there be something that is experienced 
but does not experience (= zombies)? 
If quality is undifferentiated, could there be 
different ways to respond to it? 
Just asking. 

Craig