[MD] The other side of reified

[MarshaV]

Hi Mary,   

On Jun 6, 2011, at 4:58 AM, MarshaV wrote:

> 
> Here is my (conventional/static) definition of static patterns of value:
> 
> 	Static patterns of value are processes: impermanent, 
> 	interdependent, ever-changing. (Not objects. Not subjects.  
> 	Not things-in-themselves.)  Overlapping, interconnected, 
> 	ever-changing processes that pragmatically tend to persist 
> 	and change within a stable, predictable pattern.   


Dmb has challenged this definition by removing two words (static and 
ever-changing) from their context (reifying them) and pitting them 
against each other.  As if two words pulled from a definition can 
in any way represent the whole definition.  Besides, one can easily 
understand 'ever-changing' as the 'evolution' process, which makes 
it very consistent within MoQ.  

 
Marsha 
 

 
___