[John] For if the MoQ is primarily artifactual in nature, as you claim, then there is a good reason for those voices of rejection and disappointment that have been heard on this list. As a given metaphysical system, it has holes, I'm sure.
[Arlo] Sure it does, as this is why/how it evolves. Its a stable pattern moving towards "betterness", through dialogue, exposure to other thought systems, contextualization, etc. "The Metaphysics of Quality" is what we categorize those stable patterns emanating from Pirsig's initial pursuit of Quality, his attempt to formalize and define what Quality IS. [John] But if it is primarily processional in nature, as I claim, then it's weaknesses and inadequacies are open invitations to improve it, to make it better and to actively keep it evolving. [Arlo] John, this is the nature of ALL intellectual patterns. They are ALL in continual and evolutionary negotiation. "The MOQ" is not unique in this regard, it is the fundamental nature of intellectual patterns. [Arlo previously] (1) ALL intellectual patterns are equally dynamic, they are ALL evolving dialogically [John] That's the equivalent of saying that all intellectual patterns are equally valuable. [Arlo] ?? Not at all. Some persist, some fade away. But the point is that ALL intellectual patterns are equally built upon dialogic-evolutionary ground. As this moves forward, higher-quality patterns tend to "persist" longer, they may not change as rapidly at certain points in the historical dialogue, and some may feel "entrenched" , but Pirsig's ideas are no more or no less open to Dynamic Quality than any other intellectual pattern out there. [Arlo previously] 2) the voice of the author does not hinder this, but it encourages it [John] The voice of the author has many functions, some helpful, some hindrance. [Arlo] The author's voice is simply one more voice in the dialogue, admittedly very often a respected and trusted voice, but how on earth do you think an author clarifying or supporting what HE thinks hinders a dialogue where other people are doing the same? No, this "Papal Bull" nonsense is itself the only "bull". I read people because sometimes the offer insights that I hadn't thought of, and other times I reject what they say. I mean, why is Bo's voice valuable to the evolution of Pirsig's ideas, but Pirsig's voice would be a hinderance? Do you really think people would not be critical of what Pirsig says? Would YOU not be? [Arlo previously] (3) the ideas expressed in Pirsig's metaphysics are stable patterns emanating from the wake of, call it, "metaphysicing". [John] Call it metaphysicing? Let's not. You did get the memo on kludge, I know. [Arlo] Call it what you want, "the pursuit of Quality", but the ideas expressed in Pirsig's book are the stable patterns of intellectual value emanating from this process. [John] But more to the point, there is probably no such thing in the whole world as a truly "stable" pattern. And this is even moreso with intellectual patterns. [Arlo] This was my point. [John] But there is a formation of a growing pattern, that is dynamic, and yet continues the pattern started, but is changing and evolving. [Arlo] Right, and this is Pirsig and you and me and everyone else involved in intellectual dialogue about these ideas. [John] So I think it's pragmatically more useful to think of a tree as an artifact, and the MoQ as a process. [Arlo] No, John, its pragmatically more useful to think of a tree as a stable pattern of value and the evolution towards Quality as the process. The Metaphysics of Quality is a stable pattern emanating from this intellectual pursuit of Quality. [John] And I certainly don't agree that other metaphysical systems are equally open-ended to their own evolutionary growth. [Arlo] What? You are focusing on a voice rather than the dialogue. I know of very few metaphysical systems that are not continually changing, being renegotiated, argued for and against, adapting or failing. The larger dialogue is the entire metaphysical edifice of human thought, of which Pirsig's ideas are a PART, a voice in the ongoing dialogue, said in response to what others have said in the past, and anticipating what others may say in response in the future. [John] But a metaphysics is sometimes more than a mere definition. The MoQ is such an one. [Arlo] I disagree. The Metaphysics of Quality is not more than it is, it points out to something more, for sure. But "it" is a map. A tool. A guidebook. Ideas expressed about the nature of reality that run counter to the dominant way of looking at things. [John] It's not just an intellectual exercise, but claim to try and do more than merely be a correct artifact in philosophological academe. The MoQ is also about saving the world from SOM [Arlo] You mean its a Superhero!? And here I thought it was Pirsig that wanted to rescue the intellectual level from the dominant "SOM" paradigm, and his ideas, the Metaphysics of Quality, is an intellectual tool he crafted to do just that. 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
