[Platt]
I assume you've read Gav's paean to Pantheism, the philosophy rooted
in the glories of the biological level.
[Arlo]
No, and I'll let Gav answer himself on that charge. But isn't it
possible to appreciate the "glories of the biological level" without
"mistaking dynamic and biological quality"? I mean, I don't think
Pirsig is telling anyone to abandon pleasure on the biological level.
From tantric sex to epicurean delights, I don't think the MOQ calls
for us to live a life of denied biological pleasures. So unless Gav's
paper (1) denies Dynamic Quality by mistaking it and biological
quality, or (2) calls for the pursuit of biological quality at the
expense of destroying society, then I don't think you have a case.
Let's recall too that Pirsig makes a strong case for Peyote, in
controlled and appropriate settings. And he has no problem with sex
either, extra-marital bar-whore sex. I mean, I really enjoy and find
absolutely delicious a nice ale, and I can revel in the Buddha in the
beermaking process without "mistaking biological and Dynamic
Quality". Or does all enjoyment and revelry in biological delights
mean a mistaking of DQ and bq?
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/
