Hi Steve 5 Feb. you wrote:
Pirsig: > > Flattery will get you nowhere ;-) I suspect you want to > > hear that what is "conspicuously absent" is SOM, but I am > > not sure that SOM was absent in early Biblical times since > > early social statements such as "Beware of the crocodile!" > > or "Javeh will reward you," are SOM but are not > > intellectual in the MOQ sense. Steve: > I disagree that these statements are SOM. I can't see how these > statements presuppose subjective/objective knowledge distinctions Right, at least you agree with me that the subject/object distinction is something more than (biological) self/not self and the (social) observing person as different from the dangerous crocodile. Pirsig then adds: "..but not intellectual in the MOQ sense". To me it sounds as if he here means the real SOM, the one described in ZAMM. But if so why not say "... not SOM in the intellectual sense"? Possibly because that would be affirming the SOL. Well, what's your conclusion? Doesn't it look as if the SOL interpretation is behind Pirsig's MOQ. I mean something to be deduced from it? Bo 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/
