[MD] MOQ and Completeness Theories (Sorry, Godel.)

[Arlo Bensinger]

[DMB]
Okay, I think that's the crux of it. Maybe a good analogy here would 
be positive and negative magnetic charges. In that case the positive 
charge attracts and the negative charge repels. ... Moving off the 
stove or away from the acid is to be pushed away from the low value 
situation. Or we can move toward some positively charged attractor...

[Arlo]
I understand the meaning of what's being expressed, I'm just 
expressing trouble with the terminology. Yes, I understand that you 
(and possibly John) are using the term "negative quality" to 
indicated a "low quality environment one moves away from" (although 
John is more recently implying "negative quality" as a "destructive 
force" running counter to "positive quality" which is a "constructive 
force", or at least that's how I am inferring his meaning).

I still am unclear, though, on how the term "negative quality" adds 
clarity or meaning over the term "low quality". The "push" or "pull" 
aspect is simply one of focus.

For example, in the above "moving off the hot stove" as being "pushed 
from low quality" one could also restate the context exactly by 
saying given the two contexts (the hot stove and off the hot stove) 
one is "pulled" by Quality to the "off the hot stove" context.

There is not a single case of "pushed" that cannot be restated or 
recontextualized as a "pull".

"Negative" adds nothing, as far as I can see, that can't be better 
explained by a singular impetus towards betterness. Whether I'm being 
"pushed" or "pulled" off the stove, this is just a matter of 
rhetoric, the end result I am moving from a low-quality to a 
high-quality context.

And again, I realize I am belaboring the point, as I said I 
understand the *meaning* of how you are using this term, but I think 
the term is ultimately problematic and when really examined leads to 
incoherence within a MOQ.

[DMB]
We can't just say, "Hey, it's all good" because conflicting value 
forces at always at play, like the suffering and stuckness that 
(hopefully) leads to growth and expansion.

[Arlo]
I've never said "its all good". Certainly there are low-quality or 
"bad" contexts we experience ("bad" from our vantage/focus). I am 
just saying that framing these as "negative quality" is problematic, 
or at least problematic to me.

Sitting on that hot stove may be "low quality" for you or me, but for 
those inorganic patterns they are moving towards betterness within 
their own value appraisals. It is just that their movement towards 
betterness conflicts with my appraisal of value and so I move from a 
low-quality to a higher-quality context, but this is the same thing 
the inorganic patterns in the stove are doing; low->high quality movement.