[MD] Emptiness & Quantum Mechancics

[Dan Glover]

On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 5:47 PM, Mary <marysonthego at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Oct 9, 2010, at 9:26 PM, 118 wrote:
>>
>> > Hi Marsha,
>> >
>> > I hate to step into this again, but...
>> >
>> > I see a lot of twisting of words that contain no real meaning.  A
>> pattern
>> > forms repeating motifs, what does an unpattern do?  Is it like white
>> noise?
>> > Are you talking about chaos theory (which can be patterned).  Or are
>> you
>> > talking about being spaced out on the way to work.  If you have time,
>> give
>> > me an example of an unpattern.
>
> It's not possible to give an example of an unpattern.  That's kind of the
> point.  You see, SOM is all about patterns.

Hi Mary

Forgive me, but I thought the Metaphysics of Quality is all about
patterns. But you could be right. Still, in the framework of
"subject/object metaphysics, there are only subject and objects. If I
may ask, where are patterns located in such a scheme?


>Explaining patterns, examining
> patterns, comparing and contrasting patterns.  By definition, SOM can't
> address an 'unpattern'.  The reason we have so much trouble communicating
> the essence of 'unpatterns' to SOMists is precisely because they cannot be
> addressed in the realm of patterns.  The first cut at Dynamic Quality is
> experience.  In the instant we've 'experienced', it becomes one of 2 things
> in the second cut - a subject or an object.  That's unfortunate, because
> once we've sliced things up as subjects and objects, we can no longer talk
> about Quality, or Values, or Morals.  We're hard-wired that way.  Not our
> fault, just our disability.

Dan:
In the framework of the MOQ, Dynamic Quality IS experience. Static
quality is the fallout. Subject and objects are convenient terms for
patterns of value as long as it is remembered that they are just
that... convenient terms. There are no subject and objects in the
framework of the MOQ and in fact the MOQ was invented as an antidote
to just such.

Thank you,

Dan