>===== Original Message From moq_discuss@moq.org =====
3WD:
>4th Principle: Some Qualities are better than Others
ERIN :If you wanted to explore the 4th principle you just proposed it might be
wortwhile to think about an earlier post by Rick. It seems like trying to
isolate quality is going to get messy.
RICK
I agree with the notion that the wavelength is 'worn' by the quality (so
to speak--- or an extra characteristic as he puts it). But this doesn't
really get us anywhere with respect to the tree in the woods. When the tree
falls, a quality is there for sure... but the issue is whether it's properly
called 'sound quality' before it's sampled by an observer that interprets it
as sound.
For lack of a better example of my point... Imagine walking through the
infamous forest when a bat sweeps down from the trees and screeches at you.
The quality to you will be 'sound quality' because you interpret it as such.
However, to the bat, it's more like 'sonar/radar quality'. The quality that
we perceive as sound is perceived by the bat as distance. Same air wave,
totally different significance.
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
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 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:01:52 BST