[John] I know what your problem is, you want it all crisply defined and pre-packaged and fitted into text-book encapsulation so you can control it.
[Arlo] To clarify, I am talking about the MOQ, not Quality. And yes, I do think that evolution builds from a foundation of knowing what an author is saying. About Quality, no, I do not want it crisply defined or any such thing. But the metaphysics he is proposing, yes, I do think that its important to know if his ideas about an intellectual level refer to this or that. Precisely so disagreement and evolution can precede. Example. I make no bones about my inclusion of certain other biological patterns at the social level other than "man". When I say this, I know that Pirsig said X, and I am saying Y, and so what I am saying is an expansion based on his ideas. I am NOT arguing that Pirsig really meant to include non-humans if you only ignore and revise some of his writings. But that is precisely what IS happening in the majority of perennially unchanging exchanges here. The argument is seldom about whether or not Pirsig is right or wrong about something, but about what he meant. And he could end a lot of that, and allow the dialogue to move into where he is right and where he is wrong, etc. But yeah, I suppose these are the thoughts of an evil acerdimic. :-) 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
