Dan: After re-reading 2.2 and 2.3 of Anthony's PhD thesis (it is a really great source of information for anyone serious about the MOQ, just fantastic! Anyone not familiar with it should order it today. Definitely worth the price. It is available on Ant's website www.robertpirsig.org) it seems to me that Ant isn't forming a distinction between Quality and value so much as he is saying that some values cannot be quantified in the way others can be. It appears Robert Pirsig agrees when he says:
Quality was adopted dynamically. The term itself had high Quality. I just felt ‘Quality’ had quality the way the students just ‘felt’ some student papers were better than others. I used to give the students the advice, ‘First you just “see” what has quality, then you figure out why. Don’t reverse the process, or you will get all confused.’ It is important to restate this now to avoid the perennial literary critics’ trap of thinking that the pivotal term quality is the result of some rational, analyzable process. (Pirsig, 1995b) Dan comments: I think this is what RMP means when he said that to teach writing, first teach pure quality. Let the student discover for themselves where quality is and then figure out why. If we try to figure out why first, confusion arises. ---Incredibly important, i have to study this remarks and lead's, and also Andre's questions, and your reflections , Dan,.. There are no other options i guess,..after all , the man is teaching quality, and it is recognised.-- greetzz, Adrie Thanks for the appearance, ...not easy after beiing brutalised away by Mark. I will study this lines, Andre is moving up to the top of the pyramid. "attention" -- parser 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
