> From: Andre > Andre: > Michael, you are suggesting that quality 'does' something. This is > completely misunderstanding... . Quality does not cause or do > anything. MP: I can say the same thing about God in theistic terms, btw (although admittedly many would not, but IMO their loss)
> Andre: > I like to think of myself as an MoQ'er but I do not believe in > Quality. This is the same as saying I believe in air, fairies, leprechauns, > gravity, John > Lennon. > How can one believe in something that cannot be defined? > How can you believe in something outside of yourself Michael? Think > about > this very carefully please. MP: Perhaps I need to re-read Pirsig on Quality, but my understanding is that MoQ has us believe things tend toward greater Quality getting there via Dynamic and static. While Quality can't be defined per se, that explanation is an empirical definition well enough for this excercise. You say you can't believe in it, but you do by default if you subscribe to an Mo*Q*. As such, I think God and Quality can be equated relationally. That is: God is to Theism as Quality is to MoQ. Mathematicalyl a relationship just with greater numerator and denomenator on the MoQ side. As to how I can believe in something that cannot be defined? Easy; (ducks) Faith. Faith based on empirical observation in light of an acceptance that something I cannot define is nonetheless something to which things I see are related, part of, in concert with. Gut feeling is another way to describe it. How do you do it? 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/
