[MD] Finite (SQ) and Infinite (DQ) Metaphysics

[118]

Yes, I agree with MRB, hopefully that does not sit bad with him,
seeing as some do not like what I propose.

In addition, the quote presented by Arlo is the very thing that MoQ
seeks to dispel.  This is why it puts value first, and not as
something that becomes a function of society.  This is very basic MOQ,
by the way.  If such wish for not changing rules is considered
valuable, then where does that put MoQ?  Perhaps there is more value
in the renegade, for that is what progresses a species.  My opinion
differs from Arlo's.

I am not sure if MRB is speaking of Evolution in biology, where the
environment is a selector, of if he speaks of Quality Evolution where
Quality is the selector.  Maybe it is the same thing, however, this
would put Quality as separate from a species.  What a dilemma.

Cheers,
Mark


On Sat, Jun 9, 2012 at 2:30 PM, Michael R. Brown <mrb at fuguewriter.com> wrote:
> Society, like nature, is under no obligation to be mechanically linear or
> "consistent."
>
> Thus, for instance, do humans have both monogamous and anti-monogamous
> trends in the same individual.
>
> As far as evolution goes, what promotes complex fluency-with-firmness is
> selected.
>
>
> MRB
>
>> ARLO
>
>
>> "It is a highly valued function of society to prevent changes in the rules
>> of the many games it embraces
>
>
> 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