Magnus Berg (qmgb@bull.se)
Wed, 11 Mar 1998 14:26:35 +0100
Hi Doug, sorry for not answering earlier. The sky opened
and work fell over me.
You wrote:
> Substitute the term Static Pattern of Value (SPoV) for 'Object.'
Now I'm puzzled, that was kind'a sort'a the purpose of the post.
> When you do this, remember that MoQ says Value (both DQ and SQ) is
> co-within/interpenetrating via the Interrelationships among SPoVs, a la
> Dusenberry. (See the PS example below.)
Yeah, that's one of the beauties of the analogue. Too bad only
computer nerds can appreciate, or criticize it.
> By comparison, SOM says the Value (it calls values, 'properties') or
> properties are in the Objects, a la Franz Boas. It says
> interrelationships are subjective and thus 'insubstantial.'
But still, nobody during the french revolution wanted to alter the
interrelationship between their head and neck.
> (AND,) In MoQ the 'interlevel dependency' Interrelationships are
> mediated by DQ and the five sets of Pirsig's Moral Codes.
>
> OK?
Yes, the moral codes would be built in, no DQ though.
> PS Example: A good example I use here is the old DOS command line
> interrelationship to humans as compared to the Macintosh or modern
> browser Graphical User Interface (GUI). There is incredibly more Value
> in the latter than in the former.
...been reading Gelernter I presume.
Magnus
-- "I'm so full of what is right, I can't see what is good" N. Peart - Rush-- post message - mailto:lilasqd@hkg.com unsubscribe/queries - mailto:diana@asiantravel.com homepage - http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/4670
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu May 13 1999 - 16:42:55 CEST