Re: MD SQ-SQ coherence and the Biosphere.

From: David MOREY (
Date: Thu Mar 25 2004 - 19:00:39 GMT

  • Next message: David MOREY: "MD Re: Promoting Pirsig"


    No-propensity not probability as per Popper's book
    of that title, I recommend it. Also see Prigogine on
    dissipative structures in his End Of Certainty. I know what
    you are saying but it is one possibilty, there are now clearly
    others in science. No time to expand on this at the moment.
    But its DQ/SQ all the way down I think.


    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Platt Holden" <>
    To: <>
    Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2004 1:11 PM
    Subject: Re: MD SQ-SQ coherence and the Biosphere.

    > David M
    > > This is wrong I think. See what Anthony says in his thesis
    > > about Popper and propensities.
    > From McWatt's paper: "Popper, when writing about the evolution of species,
    > talks of 'preferences of organisms for certain possibilities' thus making
    > them propensities . . ."
    > Popper talks about species and organisms, i.e., life forms, not inorganic
    > patterns.
    > > It seems that all physical
    > > systems are a mixture of static patterns and dynamic factors.
    > > So the mountain might erode to the east or west, whether it
    > > does one or the other is a dynamic matter and unpredicatable,
    > > and where there is openness maybe there is choice, perhaps such
    > > purposeful openness explains the anthropic problem of this
    > > seemingly so well connected cosmos. See what Pirsig says about
    > > purpose and causality. I think he has the answers here but fails to
    > > them to the inorganic level.
    > I think what you're describing has more to do with Laws of Probability
    > than a response to DQ. We cannot predict who in a large group is going to
    > die at a specified time, but we can predict that a certain percentage will
    > die at various ages. The life insurance industry is built on this fact.
    > Further, just because a specific event is unpredictable (on what side of a
    > mountain erosion will occur ) doesn't mean ipso facto that Dynamic Quality
    > is at work, especially in light of Pirsig's assertion that only a living
    > being can "perceive and adjust" to DQ. As I've suggested before, change by
    > itself doesn't imply the presence of or influence of DQ. Lots of static
    > patterns involve change, the most widely cited example being a flowing
    > river.
    > Regards,
    > Platt
    > MOQ.ORG -
    > Mail Archives:
    > Aug '98 - Oct '02 -
    > Nov '02 Onward -
    > MD Queries -
    > To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:

    MOQ.ORG -
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 -
    Nov '02 Onward -
    MD Queries -

    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Mar 25 2004 - 19:19:55 GMT