[MD] What kind of ethical theory is the MOQ?

[MarshaV]

Greetings Mark,

On Nov 24, 2010, at 1:26 PM, 118 wrote:

> Hi Marsha,
> I believe that Steve's question are appropriate for discussion.  Choosing
> the static patterns of value as you state.  How do you do such a thing?

That depends, or is relative to the sq & DQ within the event.  


> On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 9:36 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Marsha:
>> When 'I' use the convention label 'I' I am referring to a collection of
>> ever-changing, interrelated, impermanent, inorganic, biological, social
>> & intellectual static patterns of value.  The word 'I' is referring to a
>> ever-changine process.
> 
> [Mark]
> Marsha, surely you must think of your sense of I as being constant.  

Marsha:
I have found nothing constant.  


> [Mark]
> Sure patterns change, but you are interacting with them.  If the 'I' is
> ever-changing, are you experiencing things as somebody inherently
> different and are a different 'I' every moment?  

Marsha:
I am the patterns whether I am aware or not.  While there may be 
uniqueness to the process, there is no separate entity. 


> [Mark] 
> How do you operate under these conditions?

The 'you' that you ask about is a flow of ever-changing, interrelated, 
impermanent static patterns of value moving through a field of DQ.  
I operate either mindfully or lost in thought.  


>> Marsha:
>> Because the collection of static patterns of value are changing.  And the
>> best choice made can only be determined by the patterns available within
>> the event.
> 
> [Mark]
> Aren't there choices to be made?  How do you choose which pattern has most
> value?

Marsha:
I have discovered that mindfulness has an influence.  


>> Marsha:
>> I have considered it, and believe the self as an ever-changing, collection
>> of patterns can never be ignored.  Also the dynamic circumstances may
>> have a major affect the event.  To constrain Quality within an absolute,
>> generalized conceptual boundary seems totally anti-MoQ.
>> 
> 
> [Mark]
> The idea is not to constrain it, but to expand it.  Your sense of patterns
> seems to constrain it.

Marsha:
How so?    


>> Marsha:
>> Oh, I exist, but as a collection of ever-changing, interdependent, 
>> impermanent inorganic, biological, social & intellectual static patterns
>> of value.  And therefore, the most ethical choice would always be using
>> the best static patterns of value available in the event.  How could it be
>> otherwise?
> 
> [Mark]
> It could be many ways otherwise.  I don't understand your question.  How do
> you determine what are the best static patterns of value available in the
> event?  Isn't that what we are talking about?

Available patterns are always changing and so is dynamic circumstances.  
If I am mindful, the better choice may become apparent, but there is absolute 
way of knowing for sure what is best.  There is no absolute best.  

How do _you_ decide what is the best patterns to choose in a given event?   


> Cheers,
> Mark



And cheers to you,
Marsha  
 
___