Hello everyone On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 8:54 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Mark, All > > Dynamic Quality isn't concept free. Once you name something, it becomes a > concept. But it's a concept like "ineffable" is a concept -- pointing to > something that cannot be defined. And that leaves intellect impotent. > Intellect > can only deal with defined terms. Pirsig admitted as much. But, he said go > ahead anyway: "Getting drunk and picking up bar-ladies and writing metaphysics > is a part of life." (Lila, 5) So, yes. Even though we can't think about DQ, > go > ahead and think about it - another paradox illustrating critical thinking's > feet of clay.
Hi Platt Yes, but he said that Dynamic Quality cannot be defined by what it is, only by what it is not. It is like trying to define beauty, Is it in the object? No, otherwise everyone would agree on what is beautiful. Is it in the subject? No, otherwise no one would agree on what is beautiful. Beauty lies beyond both subect and object, in that Dynamic realm we might call the code of art. Don't you think so too? Dan 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
