Hi Horse,

In answer to your question, 1) I don't ignore everything he says, and 2) I 
agree with his statement that "The MOQ is in opposition to subject-object 
metaphysics."

All one has to do is read chapters 22 and 24 of Lila where Pirsig savages  
SOM which he specifically identifies as the intellectual level. 

I know academics and other self-appointed intellectuals don't like to hear 
that their mindset "was screwing everything up," and no doubt his 
stinging rebuke of the way they have mismanaged society has caused 
his work to be largely ignored in SOM universities. His endorsement of 
capitalism over socialism only serves to strengthened the wall of 
immunity against him erected by the professorial elites.

Finally, I appreciate your citing note 133 in Lila's Child in which Pirsig 
makes reference to my and Bo's "brilliant thinking."  :-) 

Regards,
Platt 


On 17 Apr 2010 at 18:14, Horse wrote:

> Hi Platt
> 
> Your Pirsig quote comes from that part of Lila's Child where you are 
> supporting Bo's (now) SOL idea and Pirsig disagrees with you (and as a 
> consequence Bo) about the MoQ being a SOM document based on SOM reasoning:
> 
>  From Lila's Child
> Platt:
> To fill the hole may require a new level above SOM. I´m not sure about 
> this. After all,
> the MOQ is an SOM document based on SOM reasoning. [132]
> 
> Pirsig [132]:
> It employs SOM reasoning the way SOM reasoning employs social structures 
> such
> as courts and journals and learned societies to make itself known. SOM 
> reasoning is not
> subordinate to these social structures, and the MOQ is not subordinate 
> to the SOM
> structures it employs. Remember that the central reality of the MOQ is 
> not an object or a
> subject or anything else. It is understood by direct experience only and 
> not by reasoning
> of any kind. Therefore to say that the MOQ is based on SOM reasoning is 
> as useful as
> saying that the Ten Commandments are based on SOM reasoning. It doesn´t 
> tell us
> anything about the essence of the Ten Commandments and it doesn´t tell 
> us anything
> about the essence of the MOQ.
> 
> Pirsig's notes 129, 131 and 133 also specifically disagree with Bo's 
> idea about SOM as the Intellectual level - for which you show agreement. 
> Why is it that when Pirsig states quite categorically that both you and 
> Bo are wrong about SOL - even going so far as to say that your 
> conclusions undermine the MoQ - you ignore everything he says.
> 
> Horse

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/md/archives.html

Reply via email to