[Arlo previously]
If there is some "one true MOQ", and this is tied to Pirsig's
"authority", then the interpretive argument (this is what Pirsig
"meant") becomes of paramount importance. It is no longer an
evolutionary dialogue of ideas, but a competition to claim
authoritative legitimacy.
[Ron]
Well stated. A very important point.If we are to use what we have
learned we would ask ourselves what difference it would make if one
or the other were true. Using this method would illustrate the
consequences of each and in MoQ fashion make the "Quality"
distinction. Which has more value. This is why I say this is a fine
exercise of MoQ's "theory".
[Arlo]
I see you have gotten no further in your repeated attempts to draw
forth an argument for the value of Bo's SOL/SIM/SOLAQI/"whatever
acronym Bo can think of to distract from the simple Bo's MOQ".
Surprised?
[Arlo previously]
And I think this has been why Ron has been endlessly frustrated
trying to move his dialogue with Bo away from the interpretive domain
and into the competing
"betterness" of differing ideas.
[Ron]
Exactly. Where it should be. An arguement based on interpretive
authority gets us nowhere. Mainly it should'nt matter what Bob said.
What should matter is which idea has more value? Thanx Arlo
[Arlo]
It matters what Pirsig said, as you say "mainly", only in fostering
the ground from which agreement and dissent can be soundly leveled.
Its matters, as Matt points out, in that we have come- through two
books- to trust this person's insights. This does not mean we want to
blindly follow him, or anyone, but that we have come to respect his
keen insights.
[Arlo previously]
Bo might say "A metaphysics of Quality that holds the intellectual
level to SOM is better than A metaphysics of Quality that considers
SOM to be one on many intellectual patterns", instead of "THE
metaphysics of Quality holds the intellectual level to SOM".
[Arlo adds]
I just pointed this out to Bo, but I no longer have any hopes he'll
understand. If you look at this, though, you'll see that this is
trapped in "interpretative authority"...
"THE metaphysics of Quality holds the intellectual level to SOM"
while this is a sound pointer to "which idea has more value"...
"A metaphysics of Quality that holds the intellectual level to SOM is
better than A metaphysics of Quality that considers SOM to be one on
many intellectual patterns"
Why do you think Bo is so incapable of seeing past the "THE"? It is
the only thing that is giving the SOL/SIM/SOLAQI/"whatever acronym Bo
can think of to distract from the simple Bo's MOQ" any value.
Don't expect this to change.
Getting back to the "a/the" distinction, I think conventionally we've become
accustomed to using "THE metaphysics of Quality" to specifically refer to
Pirsig's ideas (Pirsig himself uses this convention in his writing).
And as Matt
(if I understood him correctly) wrote, this is, of course, or
primary interest
to those who respect his ideas.
But when we use "THE metaphysics of Quality" in this way, does it trap the
dialogue in the interpretative domain by implying "there can be only one"?
In other words, if "THE metaphysics of Quality" = Pirsig's ideas,
then a "papal
bull" would seem to impair discussion, and capturing the
interpretative ground
would seem to be the only way to attain legitimacy.
For me, again as one of those evil "interlictials", I frame this as Pirsig's
ideas = "A metaphysics of Quality" (the foundation for which we are
all here, to
be sure), and Bo's ideas = "A metaphysics of Quality" that is a critical
revision of Pirsig's ideas.
Bo might say "A metaphysics of Quality that holds the intellectual
level to SOM
is better than A metaphysics of Quality that considers SOM to be one on many
intellectual patterns", instead of "THE metaphysics of Quality holds the
intellectual level to SOM".
And in this light there can be no "papal bulls", because the authority Pirsig
writes from informs specifically HIS metaphysics of Quality, not THE
metaphysics
of Quality.
Is this wrong? Do others see this instead as a sort of competition to claim
representing "the one true MOQ"?
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
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
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
