[MD] horse pattern

[MarshaV]

Craig,

Patterns are formed the way patterns are formed.  I think 
the opposite-from-non-horse is the best way to conceptualize
a horse-pattern, it scope.  A pattern is never the same from 
one individual to another individual, and it is not the same
from one event to another event within one individual.  It seems 
the best way to include all that might be contained in a horse 
pattern: breadth and depth, and, of course, analogies all the 
way down,   It represents well its ever-changing and 
interconnected nature, and accounts for its impermanence. 
 
Its purpose would be to prevent one from falling back into 
imagining a horse-pattern as a bounded thing-in-itself type 
of entity.  


Marsha

p.s.  Did you like my quantum wave/particle metaphor?





On May 3, 2010, at 1:54 PM, craigerb at comcast.net wrote:

> 
> 
> [Marsha] 
>>   For me, the horse patterns is best represented by opposite-from-non-horse. 
>>   It works for me yes. 
> 
> Marsha, 
> How does one acquire the concept/pattern "horse"?  They are not shown  
> a kitten & told "that is not a horse", then a beetle & told "that is not a horse", 
> etc.  That would take forever.  One is shown a horse or a picture of a horse, 
> rides a horse and so on.  Perhaps you might see a cow & think it is a female horse 
> & at that point there is some point to saying "that is not a horse". 
> Once one has the concept "horse", one can represent the concept "non-horse" & 
> then consider the opposite "horse".  But nothing is gained in doing this. 
> The wheels are spinning but no work is being done. 
> Craig
> 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/md/archives.html


 
___