Hi David,
Let me tell you my experience with Marsha.  I have refuted her
presentations in more ways than I can count.  She does not respond to
them, but grabs her megaphone and shouts out "the way it is".  So, do
not take the bait, keep doing what you are doing.  Whe will goad you
into having to explain yourself and turn the discussion against you.
I am not sure why she is doing this but MoQ has got to sink in
someday.  At least one can only hope.

We do our best to educate Marsha, but most people have given up now.
I have joined those ranks.  Remember "It's a trap".

Mark

On 2/9/12, MarshaV <valkyr@att....> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Hi David,
>
>
>>>> David:
>>>> Any change for the better is a result of DQ and not the static patterns
>>>> of that person as static patterns cannot contain DQ.. As I said above -
>>>> a unique individual is just a unique collection of patterns from the
>>>> past. There are many people who share many values however so the
>>>> patterns aren't unique to just one individual but a particular
>>>> collection of patterns is…
>>>
>>> Marsha:
>>> My definition of the individual or self is as a flow of ever-changing,
>>> conditionally co-dependent, impermanent and conceptualized static
>>> patterns of inorganic, biological, social and intellectual value in the
>>> infinite field of Dynamic Quality.
>>
>> David:
>> Once again, this is why we're having this discussion, because I disagree
>> with this statement and want to talk to you about it.
>
>
> Marsha:
> You cannot think that offering your different opinion refutes my claim that
> static patterns of value are co-dependent?  It doesn't.  If restating my
> view was annoying to you, you might consider I found no argument against it.
>  -  Maybe you should give some reason for you disagreement, especially since
> you have agreed their is no fixed-reference-point.  If static patterns of
> value are not conditionally co-dependent on causes, conditions and
> preferences and may be a further cause, condition or preference for another
> pattern, than what?  Fixed?  Independent?  A sweeping statement about
> betterment being the results of DQ states nothing.  I haven't denied the
> relationship with DQ.  In fact I state "in an infinite field of Dynamic
> Quality."  What kind of betterment?  And on who's judgement?
> Social/cultural judgements?  Ego judgements?   Since Dynamic Quality is
> indeterminate, it doesn't necessarily come with a label describing how
> things are better.
>
>
> 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
>
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