Krimel to Andre: The disservice I am referring to specifically is the claim that the Quality of ZMM is called DQ in Lila. There are two ways to understand this. The first and the one I think Pirsig and dmb use, is that DQ IS Quality. As a result there is no Quality in the Metaphysics of Quality only DQ and SQ. Aside from being awkward; it turns the MoQ into a form of dualism which I believe Pirsig would specifically like to reject.
Andre: I am still not quite sure what the problem is Krimel ( I'm a bit thick sometimes). You say 'there is no Quality in the Metaphysics of Quality only DQ and SQ'. But... this is the first slice Pirsig made!! Quality sliced into DQ/SQ! He [Pirsig] thought that Quality [of ZMM] was better divided into the Dynamic and the static-[of Lila] 'primarily because the aesthetic, mystic and scientific aspects of reality can be taken account of by this dichotomy and,as the Dynamic is the essential nature of the static, there remains, essentially, only one reality of Quality, not two'. (Anthony McWatt's PhD p 70, my insertions). As mentioned before DQ can be referred to as the 'pre-intellectual cutting-edge of reality, the source of all things, completely simple and always new... It contains no pattern of fixed rewards and punishments'.(Lila,p 119). I hope this may reconcile both your approaches Krimel since DQ is NOT to be understood as GOOD, nor as chaos. In Pirsig's words Not This, Not That. Regards 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/
