[MD] Tweaking the emergence

[MarshaV]

Mark,

You seem to confuse having "no independent existence" with having 'no existence' at all, but this is not what I am saying.  From a static (conventional) point-of-view, individuals conceptualize patterns into distinct entities.  Patterns appear to exist in their own right, but if they did exist in their own right, THEN, they would be permanent and could never change or evolve.  Patterns exist dependent on innumerable causes and conditions (patterns); patterns exist dependent on parts (patterns);  patterns exist in dependence upon a conceptual designation (patterns).


Marsha




On Feb 29, 2012, at 5:15 PM, 118 <ununoctiums at gmail.com> wrote:

> Marsha,
> If patterns have no independent existence, how is it that you
> recognize them as distinct patterns?  What you are really saying is
> that there is only one pattern, that spreads about, co-operating with
> itself.  What makes you want to divide them up into many?  Are you the
> pattern separator?  Why would you even want to do that?
> 
> According to your metaphysics, Static Quality cannot exist in stable
> patterns since such patterns do not exist; we only have a monistic
> pattern.  Where would you say your plurality of patterns comes from if
> they have no inherent existence?  With your inclusion of all into one
> pattern, are you speaking of God?
> Mark
> 
> On 2/29/12, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Tuukka,
>> 
>> "Nonrelativizably"?  It is you who are exhibiting stuckness in some
>> post-modern philosophical,  muddled thinking (words and concepts), or is it
>> Plato's distortion.  Either way it is stuckness.  You are stuck in your
>> representation of relativity.  Let go of that.  That understanding is
>> static.  Move on.
>> 
>> Quality may be compared to quantum physics's nonlocality.  Statics quality
>> exists in stable patterns relative to other patterns.  Patterns have no
>> independent existence.
>> 
>> 
>> Marsha
>> 
>> 
>>