[MD] Step One

[ADRIE KINTZIGER]

The way i'm reading his interventions, is that they are based on the
case-evidence, the material that is availiable
ie ; Turners reflections, Mc Watt's work, DMB'S abstractions, Dan's
interpretations,all the surrounding material like
interviews, William James his work and the use of this as a tool to shape
and form the science of the metaphysiks....
i can go on forever.
I can find no distortions in what Andre is presenting, he works with the
'native' material, not some home-brew drivel.
but more importantly, quality is an event, and the quality from ZAM is the
same quality from LILA, as there is no gradation in quality,
there is no other 'quality' then "QUALITY".. itself, there is no other time
then time itself ,and details like this do matter, because
to make an event possible, it needs to have a beginning and an
end,....otherwise no dynamic quality can evolve within the model.
time , the 4th dimension needs to be involved in the event QUALITY, only so
quality can be the parent of static and dynamic quality.
(imho)

Here is a Pirsig/MC Watt impression on the evolutive caracter of
quality/time/dynamic quality.
http://robertpirsig.org/MOQTime.htm
Incredibly important to note that Andre is not conflicting with any of this.
greetzz, Adrie



2010/10/25 MarshaV <valkyr at att.net>

>
>
> Andre,
>
> Your reference is, of course, to ZMM which doesn't not present
> a metaphysics, static patterns of value, Intellectual or otherwise,
> or a hierarchical, evolutionary structure.
>
>
> Marsha
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Oct 25, 2010, at 3:35 AM, Andre Broersen wrote:
>
> > Platt to Mark:
> >
> > In the Metaphysics of Quality, the source of concepts such as SOM is
> > Dynamic Quality. DQ  is the source of all things.
> >
> > Andre:
> > I stand corrected here Platt but this does not seem quite right. Yes, as
> Phaedrus puts it in ZMM
> > 'The Quality event is the cause of the subjects and the objects,...' but
> this does not yet make for a
> > [subject-object] metaphysics. SOM emerged out of the observation with
> which Phaedrus concludes the sentence:'... which are then mistakenly
> presumed to be the cause of Quality!'. (ZMM, p234)
> >
> > SOM does not acknowledge DQ. It suggests that the basic stuff 'composing'
> reality are subjects and objects full stop...and that Quality is an
> attribute of subjects and objects. This is backwards.
> >
> > 'The dilemma all the time had this unseen vile presumption in it, for
> which there was no logical justification, that Quality was the effect of
> subjects and objects. It was not!He brought out his knife.
> > 'The sun of Quality' he wrote 'does not revolve around the subjects and
> objects of our existence. It does not passively illuminate them. It is not
> subordinate to them in any way.It has created them. They are subordinate to
> it'(ibid)
> >
> >
> > 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
>



-- 
parser