[SA]
Where does the MOQ state s and o is separated from value?
FROM WIKI
(a seemingly debateable source)
However it re-affirms my position.
[edit] Quality
"Quality", or "value" as described by Pirsig, cannot be defined because
it empirically precedes any intellectual constructions. It is the
"knife-edge" of experience, known to all. "What distinguishes good and
bad writing? Do we need to ask this question of Lysias or anyone else
who ever did write anything?" (Plato's Phaedrus, 258d). Likening it with
the Tao, Pirsig believes that Quality is the fundamental force in the
universe stimulating everything from atoms to animals to evolve and
incorporate ever greater levels of Quality. According to the MOQ,
everything (including mind, ideas and matter) is a product and a result
of Quality.
[Ron]
Pirsig places quality before subjects and objects correct?
SOM places quality after subjects and objects correct?
Quality may equal value correct?
I think Quality is inseperable from subjects and objects.
I think subjects objects and Quality are one.
By redefining Quality as static and dynamic, Pirsig
makes the distinction between static patterns of value
and dynamic quality (which has no definition) which equates
to value. So, when we say static patterns of value or
static Quality we are speaking of the 4 levels of
reality we experience- inorganic, organic (objective)
and social and intellectual (subjective).
By placing immediate cutting edge experience (dynamic/value)
before static patterns of value (s/o) he separates value from
subjects and objects correct? and makes value/quality central
as the genesis of all things correct?
He goes on to say that Quality/Value is betterness and that
the universe is a moral order by this. correct?
[WIKI]
[edit] Static and Dynamic qualities
The MOQ divides Quality into two forms: static quality patterns
(patterned) and Dynamic Quality (unpatterned). The four patterns of
static value as well as Dynamic Quality account exhaustively for all of
reality. As the initial (cutting edge) Dynamic Quality become
habituated, it turns into static patterns.
Pirsig defines static quality as everything that can be conceptualized
or recognized as forming patterns. Pirsig further divides static quality
into inorganic, biological, social and intellectual patterns, in
ascending order of morality.
[Ron]
I find it particularly interesting that wiki also added this:
"It is important to note that Pirsig is not proposing a duality: Quality
is one, yet manifests itself differently."
as if this interpretation of duality could be construed if one was not
careful.
they are careful to note this and I agree subject object and value are
indeed one.
The problem is the double terminology of value...value preceeds subjects
and objects
yet value subjects and objects are also one. it seems contradictory. So
you see
SA, there is still this split of sorts if not anything is very subtle.
It could be
interpreted two ways or both ways so that now there are three
interpretations possible
if not at all correct which I say reflects in the MOQ discuss.
am I coming in from the stratosphere now? or am I still orbiting jupiter
somewhere.
thanks SA, I feel I'm closer to my dilemma.
-Ron
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/
