Ron quoting Pirsig:
> "The question of "How do you justify the
> statement that Quality equals
> reality?" was the best one. The correct answer from a
> MOQ perspective
> is, "by the harmony it produces", but this answer
> is only for people who
> already understand the MOQ. Those who don't can't
> see the harmony and
> for them this answer is meaningless.
SA: "by the harmony it produces", would you say this means, 'by the harmony
reality produces.' Same thing?
Ron goes on quoting Pirsig:
> "We see that these people want rational justification,
> usually "objective" justification "
SA: That's such a good comment!
> Ron:
> 10 years later, the same misinterpretations exist.
> Perpetuated by the
> same person.
> After all this time with no substantive answers and nothing
> new to introduce
SA: I would say, that's key: "nothing new to introduce". Bo is trying to
wait this out and possess the moq for himself. Pirsig does all the work and Bo
tries to steal it. Yet, Bo has changed the moq to the point that Bo really
needs to come up with his own philosophy and just call it a day. Listen to Bo,
he says stuff like, "I'm still here" and "Nobody's been able to dismiss me
yet." That's a tin-ear if I've ever seen one. I mean there is this letter
Pirsig wrote to Bo, ah, in the year 2000.
Ron:
> and no progress made in their assumptions one would think that
> it was time to revisit the problem with an eye toward what was initially
> missed.
SA: Bo states there is a problem, but so many people say there isn't a problem
with the moq.
SA
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/
