Ron says: Not refute it but explain that the code of art, dynamic quality, is primary to static quality by way of MoQ morality. when you say : "Well, the Quality Reality (the DQ/SQ) ... or simply the MOQ .... is neither dynamic or static so these conclusions don't apply."?? You say DQ/SQ? is niether static nor dynamic yet you say that reality is DQ/SQ. What IS MoQ then if it is niether DQ or SQ? What you say here in effect is that reality is not reality, I must ask what then is reality if it is not reality?
Andre: Good Ron. You've made a very interesting observation about which I have been thinking for a bit. Problem with Pirsig's use of language is that it can be interpreted in different ways as having different meanings. He did not call the code of art 'Dynamic quality' ! He called it 'Dynamic morality'. Now,... elsewhere he calls the ( evolutionary 'drive') the Dynamic force. One can only speculate on whether he has meant the same thing in all 3 examples or whether there actually is an intentional difference in meaning which is intended (within the context of the MoQ). Maybe, maybe not. For me, this is yet another example of being 'suspended in language' but also another example of Pirsig's own doing, namely: creating a dualism out of One.(i.e Quality). For the moment I'll stay with the quoted passages and say that the MoQ = DQ/SQ...the Code of Art...Dynamic morality. It is both...i.e.within and without and between....above intellect. I am not the expert, I just followed my feeling and creating this juxtaposition gave me a feeling of fresh air. Andre 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/
