[MD] Why are things called patterns?

[118]

Hi Dan,
It is futile.  She retorts with the one-lined parakeet phrases.  I do
not think there is much going on there, and certainly nothing to
educate.
Cheers,
Mark

On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 11:12 PM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> On Mar 11, 2012, at 1:18 AM, Dan Glover <daneglover at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hello everyone
>>
>> On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 8:33 PM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Dan,
>>>
>>> On Mar 10, 2012, at 8:32 PM, Dan Glover <daneglover at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hello everyone
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 2:13 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hello Dan,
>>>>>
>>>>> I think it best to consider static patterns of value from two different points-of-view. The first would be the nature of all patterns:  conditionally co-dependent, impermanent, ever-changing and conceptualized.  The process of conceptualization would pertain to all patterns (ideas/language).
>>>>
>>>> Dan:
>>>> Are you saying these patterns exist in and of themselves?
>>>
>>> Marsha:
>>> Not at all, I am not saying that patterns exist in and of themselves.  I was suggesting that all patterns (inorganic, biological, social & intellectual) have an interdependent relationship with the process of conceptualization.
>>
>> Dan:
>> Why isn't this a case of mistaking the finger for the moon at which it
>> is pointing?
>
> Marsha:
> Why would it be mistaking the finger for the moon?  Can patterns ever represent more than pointing?  I'd answer no.
>
>
>>> Dan:
>>>> If so, then
>>>> I disagree. I think they are provisional... they work until something
>>>> better comes along. Seeing static patterns of quality as ever-changing
>>>> and impermanent seems to go against Robert Pirsig's notion that it is
>>>> best to find a balance between Dynamic Quality and static quality. If
>>>> static patterns are always changing, how could we hope to form static
>>>> latches? Wouldn't any evolutionary advance necessarily fall back?
>>> Marsha:
>>> A river is ever-changing, but changes within a stable pattern.  Skin is ever-changing, but changes within a stable pattern.  Static patterns of value pragmatically tend to persist and change within a stable, predictable pattern.
>>
>> Dan:
>> So the patterns are not 'ever-changing' so much as changing within the
>> context of stability... or static patterns responding to Dynamic
>> Quality...
>
> Marsha:
> No, they are ever-changing, but change within a stable, predictable pattern.  Certainly within the relationship with consciousness (the flow thoughts), patterns come into existence, transform and pass away in a moment, and a pattern is never exactly the same as it was even a moment before.  Additionally, patterns would be different for each individual dependent on their static pattern history.
>
>
>>>>> Marsha:
>>>>> The second point-of-view would be categorization by evolutionary function into their four-level, hierarchical structure: inorganic, biological, social and intellectual.  Then intellectual static patterns of value are a particular category of pattern that began to emerge with the ancient Greeks and functions in a particular manner:  mathematics, philosophy, science, etc.
>>>>
>>>> Dan:
>>>> Why not simply say intellectual patterns are ideas. It is a good idea
>>>> to state inorganic patterns of quality come first. It is a better idea
>>>> to say that Quality comes first.
>>>
>>> Marsha:
>>> Because static quality represents all that can be conceptualized and conceptualization includes thoughts and ideas.  Static patterns of value from all the levels are conceptually constructed.  It is a better idea to say that Quality comes first, but would Quality exist without the relationship with the conceptualization process?
>>
>> Dan:
>> The four levels represent an encyclopedia of reality... a way of
>> ordering. They represent more than intellectual patterns of quality.
>> Here, you seem to be saying intellectual quality is all there is, but
>> this goes against the MOQ.
>
> Marsha:
> I am not saying all patterns are just concepts.  I am saying that all patterns, including inorganic, bioligical and social patterns, have a relationship with the conceptualization process.  Additionally, I am saying that all patterns can be categorized, or ordered, into the four-level, hierarchical, evolutionary structure.  I agree that all patterns may be thought to represent an encyclopedia of reality.
>
>
>> Thank you,
>>
>> Dan
>
> Marsha
>
>
>
> 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