Hi Platt/Ham Platt said:Pirsig's "primary source" cannot be an object since the MOQ's perspective views the subject-object division as a necessary illusion created by intellect. "Quality, on which there is complete agreement, is a universal source of things." (Lila, 6) Note the absence of any division.
DM: Would it be fairer to say that the MOQ sees SOM as one way to look at experience, one that covers both what we call common sense/culture and also much of intellectual culture but the MOQ points out the problems with this take (or cut as Piirsig says) on experience and suggests that a better cut that retains most of the benefits of SOM is MOQ. MOQ is also better at explaining its own existence and is more self-conscious too about how experience is that basis of knowledge and not some objective reason cut off from experience. Much in line with John Dewey. 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.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
