On Jun 24, 2010, at 4:16 AM, Andre Broersen wrote:
Marsha to Andre:
>
>Andre, the evangelist?
>
>Andre:
>No, the only evangelist I seem to remember bearing the name 'Andreas' was
>taken care of by the Romans: they crossed the wood and hanged him...upside
>down...as his request. He felt himself unworthy to die in the same manner as
>his master. (is this about right John?)
>
Marsha:
I'm familiar with the story.
>Marsha:
>I find both Bo and Platt exhibit great respect for Mr. Pirsig's intellectual
>capacity and achievement.
>
>Andre:
>By calling the things he said 'nonsense'? By suggesting that the Phaedrus of
>LILA had 'lost nerve'? By dismissing most of LC annotations as 'confusing' and
>pandering to SOM 'pressure'?
>
Marsha:
Although prone to reason, I believe RMP would state non-sense has its place. I
believe one can have full respect for RMP and still disagree with him on
certain issue. Rationality is not perfect.
>Somewhere in ZMM, after they have come down from the mountain, Chris tells his
>Dad; You're not very brave, are you? To which his Dad replies, that may be so
>but you'll be surprised how smart I am.
>
>I think Bodvar and Platt underestimate the smartness of the MOQ and all Mr.
>Pirsig has said about it.
>
Marsha:
I think Bodvar and Platt do not underestimate the smartness of the MoQ and Mr.
Pirsig's genius.
>Marsha:
>You are insisting on one truth when RMP has clearly stated that the MoQ
>supports multiple truths,
>
>Andre:
>Yes, about static quality but not about the MOQ itself...
Marsha:
If you are referring to the MoQ as a theory presented in ZMM, LILA & etc., than
it is a set of intellectual patterns susceptible to multiple truths. If you
are referring to the MoQ as designating Reality=Quality(DQ/sq) than it is
indivisible, undefinable and unknowable.
Mr. Pirsig has clearly indicated some limits to how to interpret the MOQ. He
has made this clear especially in the Annotations. He has said openly that
Platt's and Bodvar's interpretation 'undermines' the MOQ.
>
The MoQ as Quality(unpatterned experience(DQ)/patterned experience(sq)) is
indivisible, undefinable and unknowable, so that's off the table. And the MoQ
(ZMM,LILA,LC&etc.) as conventional/static explanation is ???? Is what? Why
don't you tell me? When RMP wrote that there was no Papal Bull, he is allowing
for his child healthy growth. He may still at any time decide to issue a Papal
Bull, but so far he has not chosen that route.
Ooopps, I forgot: Bodvar sees the MOQ as BEING Reality, Experience,Quality! Of
course! Ahh,this clears the confusion and anything goes.............?
>
And I do also see MoQ as a symbol designating Reality=Quality.
>Marsha:
>I am sorry if things for you are on the chaotic side.
>
>Andre:
>Not really chaotic Marsha. I just make sure that I regularly change the oil,
>check the gas-level in the tank, see if the tyres don't wear down too low, and
>make sure the chain is on the correct tension.
>
>But thank you for your concern.
>
Sounds like a good attitude.
Marsha
p.s. I'm having a bit of trouble with Mail, but I'll try to keep up.
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
