From: Platt Holden (pholden@sc.rr.com)
Date: Fri Mar 19 2004 - 23:49:23 GMT
Hi Mark,
I'm going to be tied up for the weekend so won't have time to respond
completely to your good post. But here's my reaction to your answer to my
first question:
> > Mark 18-03-04: Beauty is a coherent patterned relationship with Dynamic
> > Quality. (9 words).
>
> Great. Now I'm confused as to the meaning of 'coherent pattern' because if
> you mean by 'coherent' something that is 'logical,' beauty is inexplicable
> in logical terms. If you mean be 'coherent' something that is 'ordered,'
> then 'pattern' becomes redundant because patterns by definition are
> ordered. I'm not just being nit-picky for the fun of it; I'm really trying
> to grasp your concept.
>
> Mark: 19-03-04: Sincere thanks for perseverance Platt. I hope it leads
> somewhere? My dictionary defines 'cohere' as: To be logically or
> aesthetically consistent. (Variations of this bring in consistency of
> purpose also, but it's a long quote.) Here we see the terms 'logic' and
> 'aesthetic' appearing in the same definition. I like this, because for me,
> logic IS an aesthetically coherent intellectual pattern of value evolving
> in a relationship with DQ.
I agree that logic is an aesthetically satisfying intellectual pattern of
value. But wouldn't it be more accurate to say it evolved as a result of
DQ's influence on it's creator, Aristotle?
> Poincaré talks of the beauty of maths, and
> maths is nothing if not logical? So, no problems there re: the MoQ. If the
> working definition of beauty becomes, a coherent patterned relationship
> with Dynamic Quality, then Logic may said to be, a beautiful intellectually
> patterned relationship with DQ.
Mathematics is logical, but it's an entirely separate discipline from
logic. There's symbolic logic that sort of looks like math, but it's a far
cry from the sort of mathematics physicists use to describe things like
relativity and string theory. Logic as used in the dictionary definition
of 'coherence' refers I'm sure to Aristotelian logic, not higher
mathematics, and thus is a static intellectual pattern whose
'relationship' with DQ has long since passed. So I would say yes, logic
may be said to be a beautiful intellectual pattern, but it has no
relationship to DQ now having remained basically unchanged for a thousand
years. (Fuzzy logic, a fairly recent intellectual pattern, is also a
static pattern at this point.)
I sure I haven't explained myself too well, so please don't hesitate to
challenge anything I've said. More to come later when I get a chance to
absorb the rest of your post.
Best to you,
Platt
P
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Mar 19 2004 - 23:48:36 GMT