[MD] e: Reading & Comprehension

[plattholden at gmail.com]

Hi Marsha,

Right. DQ doesn't mean change per se. Many static patterns change constantly. 
Like S/O intellect that changes to support an individual's preconceived beliefs 
or to justify one's allegiance to the prevailing "feel-good" social patterns. 
DQ is about betterness, not the waxing and waning of the moon. 

Platt   




On 16 May 2010 at 10:57, MarshaV wrote:

Hello John, 

I think that nature is one of the most dynamic static patterns, 
but it's still pattern applied to DQ.  


Marsha




On May 16, 2010, at 10:04 AM, John Carl wrote:

> Marsha, Marsha, Marsha.
> 
> Nature is a static pattern?  Then you believe everything is.  I can't
> imagine anything more dynamic than  nature.
> 
> At least the nature we have here in California, but I'm quite sure its the
> same everywhere.
> 
> 
> On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 10:25 PM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Hi Ian,
>> 
>> I'm not sure how I responded to is "NATURE is intellect", but 'nature' is
>> a static pattern of value, not an absolute.  No matter how forceful he
>> states it, I'm not going to take anything as a given until I consider it
>> fully.  I was discussing a level of patterns, and I had the feeling he was
>> discussing 'thinking'.  There is something in the way he uses the
>> word 'intellect' that makes me think it's about thinking in general.
>> 
> 
> 
> Just this morning I was thinking about my earlier discussion with Horse and
> Arlo on the dividing line between intellect and intelligence, and how that
> fits with know-how vs. know-that and it sems very clear to me this morning
> that know-how is intelligence and know-that is intellect.
> 
> An amoeba knows how to avoid a puddle of acid, but it doesn't know that it's
> avoiding a puddle of acid.  Know-how is biological and know-that is human.
> 
> Doesn't it all just sort of dovetail together nicely?  I feel like I'm
> getting a really solid metaphysical understanding (know-that) here.
> 
> 
>> 
>> One can look at all patterns as 'conceptions', or one can look at
>> what patterns represent, their category or function.  I can all too
>> easily toss it all off to conceptual vapor, and go chop wood.  But I'm
>> curious to thoroughly understand how it works.  If I can.  It is not
>> unimportant to the way lives are lived.
>> 
>> Am I weird?
>> 
> 
> 
> Compared to normal people, probably.  Compared to me and others on MD, no.
> 
> Chopping Wood?  Today is the day for gardening.  Nature beckons!
> 
> take care,
> 
> John
> 
> 
> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On May 16, 2010, at 1:02 AM, Ian Glendinning wrote:
>> 
>>> Arlo, Marsha,
>>> 
>>> Marsha, is your problem reacting to Arlo saying this is how it is -
>>> the insulting schoolmasterly impression - because you are missing that
>>> his sentences start with IF ?
>>> 
>>> Just logical consequences of the statements of others.
>>> 
>>> Ian
>>> 
>>> On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 9:14 PM, Arlo Bensinger <ajb102 at psu.edu> wrote:
>>>> [Marsha]
>>>> The
>>>> lament
>>>> is
>>>> based
>>>> on
>>>> a
>>>> misconception:
>>>> that
>>>> entities (self & object)
>>>> exist
>>>> independently.
>>>> 
>>>> [Arlo]
>>>> Which is... TAADAA!.. SOM! If ALL intellectual patterns are SOM, this is
>> NOT
>>>> a misconception, it is the NATURE of intellect.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> 
>> 
>> 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
>> 
> 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


 
___
 

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