Bodvar to Andre: I understand, but for Heaven sake WHY?
Andre: Because one is from a static perspective and the other from a dynamic perspective. Please Bodvar, you do realize the (experiential) difference between the two?! Bodvar: The SOL interpretation has much less "bits and pieces" that the Quality/MOQ one. Andre: Clearly not because to accommodate your SOL interpretation you have to invent a new level from somewhere which messes up a wonderful MOQ. Bodvar: As shown in "The Summary" the Quality/MOQ is created by Pirsig. Andre: Yes, and he is very consistent. YOU are the one that makes it into a meta-metaphysics. Bodvar: Problem with you is not having understanding the initial metaphysical inside-out turn that makes value the base of everything, thus static value is value too while you treat SQ as some latter-day equivalent of SOM's "objective". Andre: And this is entirely your interpretation of the 'inside-out turn' and SQ as having a so called 'objective' status. The IDEA that there were inorganic- and organic patterns of value before sentience is a high quality intellectual pattern of value because of empirical/scientific evidence. Bodvar: Sure, we live within the static range, DQ is too dangerous to play with. Phaedrus did and paid a heavy price, but it brought us the MOQ and it must not be squandered. Andre: The inside-out turn again Bodvar. Phaedrus did not play with DQ. DQ played with him...you are objectifying DQ...and must add that the MOQ is 'squandered' in your SOL=intellect hands. 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
