[MD] Paradox

[Arlo Bensinger]

[Marsha]
I hope Arlo does not mind me reposting it; I only save posts I think 
are the most brilliant.

[Arlo]
Arlo doesn't mind, although since I was not a part of your 
disagreement with DMB, I am not sure what kind of "HA!" John thinks 
this conveys, but oh well. Nor am I sure your point?

But since this seems to imply your asking me my thoughts, and to 
clarify, I'll chime in.

First, I agree with Dave in that presenting only two options 
(ever-changing and never-changing) is wrong. I also agree that 
Dynamic Quality is best understood as "ever-changing", so using that 
term to describe static quality unnecessarily conflates and confuses the two.

Yes, when viewed from an "eternal perspective", all static patterns 
change over time. None are "eternally permanent" and un-changing. 
But, for me, the distinction is that it is pragmatically useful for 
us to act in the world by seeing static patterns as unchanging enough 
to be, for all intents and purposes, "unchanging" and "discrete".

For example, I know that when I go into a pub and park my Harley 
outside, when I come out in a few hours (barring theft) my motorcycle 
will be as I left it, and I know I will be able to discern my 
motorcycle from a cloud, the dirt and even the motorcycle next to it. 
Sure, if you ask me I will acknowledge that in thousands of years the 
metal and fiberglass and rubber and whatnot that compromise my Harley 
will have likely "changed" through disintergration or some other 
transformative process.

But pragmatically, it is of more value to me to act as if the bike is 
unchanging and discrete. Yes, I know this is ultimately an illusion. 
Yes, I know the motorcycle is not eternally unchanging in the cosmos. 
But acting like the bike is "ever changing" and "indiscrete" from 
other static patterns would leave me very hindered at acting in the real world.

So saying the bike is "ever-changing" and "indiscrete from other 
patterns" has no real practical value. So I don't act with pragmatic 
consideration at the knowledge that in 100,000 years the iron will be 
disintegrated. I don't act with pragmatic consideration that its 
patterns are part of the clouds above and dirt below and other 
machines next to it.

I can hear the mechanics chiming in that one HAS to pragmatically 
recognize the changes going on within the motorcycle to keep it 
running, and I am not saying these can be pragmatically ignored. I am 
talking about the "staticness" that keeps the motorcycle from 
disappearing as a "motorcycle", and for me that is rooted in the 
pragmatic value that acting as if the machine is stable over time and 
discernable from the birds flying overhead brings.

I know in billions and billions of years the earth will no longer 
exist, the sun will be dead, maybe our entire galaxy may be collapsed 
into a black hole, but its more useful to me to act regarding my 
motorcycle still being in the parking garage when I go back for it, 
and that I will be able to discern my motorcycle from the cars, the 
stones, the people, the fence, the bushes, etc.