Dearest Andrè,
You were shocked by my "accusation" that this from Pirsig's
Summary.
"The Metaphysics of Quality itself is static and should be
separated from the Dynamic Quality it talks about."
..is SOM in a Q-disguise. I regret that, but it's complete nonsense.
Quality is part and parcel of the MOQ.
Bodvar before :
> > "Where was Quality before Pirsig"?
My cryptic question harks back to ZAMM's "Newton's Gravity"
argument which shows that great theories aren't mere descriptions
of reality, but creates realities, yet afterwards they seen as mere
descriptions of something too obvious to be questioned (from
ZAMM)
"I honestly don't know what a thing has to do to be
nonexistent. It seems to me that law of gravity has passed
every test of nonexistence there is. You cannot think of a
single attribute of nonexistence that that law of gravity
didn't have. Or a single scientific attribute of existence it
did have. And yet it is still `common sense' to believe that it
existed. [.....] `Well, I predict that if you think about it long
enough you will find yourself going round and round and
round and round until you finally reach only one possible,
rational, intelligent conclusion. The law of gravity AND
GRAVITY ITSELF did not exist before Isaac Newton. No
other conclusion makes sense. ``And what that means,'' I
say before he can interrupt, ``and what that means is that
that law of gravity exists nowhere except in people's
heads." (my caps)
What Phaedrus meant is that gravitation as a force permeating the
universe emerged with Newton. Things fell to the ground before
but this was - and still is - observation data. Nowadays the
conviction that gravity governs the universe is so cemented that
P's argument that the theory created gravity looks weird, but we
aren't here to slosh old tea, are we?
Thus by the same irrefutable logic Quality as a force permeating
the universe emerged with Pirsig. To "believers" this explains
observational data the best and it looks as if Quality has been from
ever. Pirsig's (Summary) comment is an effort to create the same
distance between the MOQ and Quality that SOM postulates
between Newton's Theory and Gravity.
Andre about where Quality were:
> 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.
Yes, in retrospect - after having accepted the MOQ premises - we
may point to this and that proof in the past of Quality having ruled
for ever and ever. OK, no more sophistry.
Bodvar
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/
