[MD] The return of the Dynamics of Value

[Jan-Anders]

Hi Mark, Ham and all

I chose a new header instead of hijacking the old DOV thread. But this 
is a follow-up of the former.

Value is depending on the relation between subjects and object or just 
events and there are different kind of values.

Lets imagine a model of a universe, a small one consisting of only one 
planet and one man on it.

The man tries to stand up and finds the vertical line to keep the 
balance. He stands up because he find it having higher quality than just 
following the gravitational forces that tries to keep him as near the 
ground as possible. In Lila ch 11 or 12 we can read about RMP's question 
how quality works against the nature, against the 2nd law of entropy, 
about what it is with the quality that produces chemistry professors out 
of atoms and molecules and so on.

Staning up on a planet is just one example of how quality works. The man 
finds a better value in the vertical direction. If he can stand still on 
one foot and close his eyes and keep the balance he is really good at 
it. Stable patterns are found in numerous variations through the 
evolution. Many animals use four leg, trees use one "leg" to balance 
their crown in the sky, tyrannosaurs used two big legs and their tail as 
a third foot. Humans walk on two legs and some like two wheeled 
motorcycles..

Keeping the balance is a process. It never stops. Keeping the balance is 
something we constantly choose. Any organism that wants to keep balance 
has to chose a strategic pattern that works in its lifetime. Mutating 
into a four leg animal is an easy way. Threes has confidence in their 
hardness of the limb and root but has payed for this by the inability to 
move.

The balancing value is in this case a direction. Where ever the man 
moves around on the planet there is always a vertical line which is the 
correct value for his balance. But as you know a planet is round and 
that means that for every new point he choose to stand, the vertical 
direction is different to any other. There is an infinite number of 
places to stand and by that an infinite number of directions that are 
all correct to keep the balance. It only depends on the relation in the 
room between the man and the planet. Just as a picture of a value to the 
man.

Now for the planet we know that the gravitational force from the man to 
the planet is just negligible. But if we exchange the man into another 
planet just about 1/10 as big as the first planet and put it on the 
surface of the first planet. The smaller planet will feel as it has 
something heavy under it even with the smaller amount of gravity. In our 
imagination we can change perspective and let the smaller planet be the 
subject and the bigger the object and vice versa. Anything we separate 
by any kind of dichotomy has both their own value from the objective and 
the subjective side. It is just a question of how we place them.

When two round things meet, which one will be at balance? It is 
impossible for a round thing to find the vertical balance. But that lack 
of stability can be used in a wheel instead where the quality of rolling 
is depending of the total lack of stability.

Flat dog - no good..

Jan-Anders