On Sep 12, 2010, at 3:32 PM, david buchanan wrote: > > Marsha quoted Pirsig: > "Any philosophic explanation of Quality is going to be both false and true > precisely because it is a philosophic explanation. The process of philosophic > explanation is an analytic process, a process of breaking something down into > subjects and predicates. What I mean (and everybody else means) by the word > quality cannot be broken down into subjects and predicates. This is not > because Quality is so mysterious but because Quality is so simple, immediate > and direct." (ZMM, Chapter 20) > > dmb: > Not that Marsha is going to hear it, but this quote cannot be applied to the > metaphysics of quality or any other philosophical explanation. He's talking > about the difference between direct experience and the analytic process, > between dynamic and static quality. This here place is a philosophical > discussion group where you need words, ideas and keyboards. Simple, immediate > and direct experience is not a metaphysical system. The MOQ is. The MOQ in no > way prohibits the discussion of the MOQ or any other philosophy. It says that > DQ is pre-intellectual and outside language but philosophy is not outside > those things.
Marsha: My understanding falls differently. And I do not believe that you really understand the MoQ. You have your point-of-view, but I think it is rather shallow. > dmb: > By the way, my accounting says this was Marsha's 27th post of the day - so > far. Let's add "manic" and "obnoxious" to the list of names, shall we? Marsha: Nice. Well done. That's exactly the kind of careful, responsible, non-evasive reply I was asking for. You've defended your statements with wit and skill, as always. That's pure genius. Very respectable. Wish I'd thought of 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
