Bodvar: Very short, the harm is that the MOQ doesn't make it out of SOM. Pirsig says that Quality is dynamic and the MOQ is static, but it's plain that here dynamic=objective and static=subjective. To turn Phaedrus most apt Newton Gravity argument (ZAMM) against him "Where was Quality before Pirsig"? The MOQ is the Quality Reality!!!!!!!!!!
Hi Bodvar, I'd like to respond more fully but will be busy. When Pirsig says: 'DQ/SQ became the basic division of his emerging MoQ...not subject and object but static and Dynamic is the basic division of reality' (Lila p 119)....I had to look and think twice as well: Subject=static?? and Dynamic=objective?? NO!! Static refers to the 'fusion' of the S/O distinction (no more subjects and objects!!!!) conceptualised in the MoQ as 'patterns'. Dynamic is not a concept, it is only a referring term for immediate experience. Bodvar: "Where was Quality before Pirsig"? Andre: Everywhere!! But as something to be lived and taught it had died with the Sophists and Pirsig has resurrected it and has built a wonderful moral program to be lived and taught and shared. Of course over the centuries various patterns have responded to said "Quality' only under different names. Bodvar: The MOQ is the Quality Reality!!!!!!!!!! Andre: A description of... .but not. For what it is worth. 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/
