[MD] Betternes - 4 levels of!

[ADRIE KINTZIGER]

Bulls eye this one , Dan.
thanks.

2010/11/2 Dan Glover <daneglover at gmail.com>

> Hello everyone
>
> On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 2:52 PM, ADRIE KINTZIGER <parser666 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Hi Horse
> >
> > Agreed. I see no problem here. But again, this "betterness" that Ron
> > is pointing to... I just don't see that there are four kinds, or five,
> > as the case may be. They all point to the same underlying idea... that
> > there is some "thing" driving static quality patterns of value towards
> > freedom. In the MOQ, we call that some "thing" Dynamic Quality. And
> > yes, I can see that we are both right and both wrong. I just think it
> > is confusing to state that there are four kinds of better, especially
> > if we say Dynamic Quality is what's better. Now, we have four kinds of
> > Dynamic Quality. I prefer to look towards the commonality of the
> > underlying notion of "betterness" guiding the evolutionary history of
> > static quality and not posit this "betterness" as part of that. Once
> > we do that, we've effectively defined Dynamic Quality. That way,
> > stagnation awaits.
> >
> > Thank you,
> > Dan.
> >
> > Hi , Dan,I understand your concerns.
> > They are of importance,no question about it.
> > I think i agree on your line of reasoning but allow me to make a remark
> > if stagnation awaits,along the path, as well on the forum as irl, it will
> be
> > a temporary stagnation,...The Giant itself cannot stagnate, with dynamic
> > quality as engine.
> > The Giant himself will move on, dynamically, without hesitation.
>
> Hi Adrie
>
> Or herself. :)
>
> Yes I understand what you are saying, thank you. From LILA:
>
> "With the identification of static and Dynamic Quality as the
> fundamental division of the world, Phaedrus felt that some kind of
> goal had been reached. This first division of the Metaphysics of
> Quality now covered the spectrum of experience from primitive
> mysticism to quantum mechanics. What remained for Phaedrus to do next
> was fill in the gaps as carefully and methodically as he could.
>
> "In the past Phaedrus' own radical bias caused him to think of Dynamic
> Quality alone and neglect static patterns of quality. Until now he had
> always felt that these static patterns were dead. They have no love.
> They offer no promise of anything. To succumb to them is to succumb to
> death, since that which does not change cannot live. But now he was
> beginning to see that this radical bias weakened his own case. Life
> can't exist on Dynamic Quality alone. It has no staying power. To
> cling to Dynamic Quality alone apart from any static patterns is to
> cling to chaos. He saw that much can be learned about Dynamic Quality
> by studying what it is not rather than futilely trying to define what
> it is.
>
> "Static quality patterns are dead when they are exclusive, when they
> demand blind obedience and suppress Dynamic change. But static
> patterns, nevertheless, provide a necessary stabilizing force to
> protect Dynamic progress from degeneration. Although Dynamic Quality,
> the Quality of freedom, creates this world in which we live, these
> patterns of static quality, the quality of order, preserve our world.
> Neither static nor Dynamic Quality can survive without the other."
>
> Dan comments:
>
> Two comments stand out... we both static quality and Dynamic Quality
> to survive, and blind obedience to either is futile. Rather than
> trying to define Dynamic Quality as what it is, we need to look at
> what it is not. Great points to keep in mind.
>
> Thanks again, Adrie.
>
> Dan
> 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
>



-- 
parser