Hi Dan and All As I read your response to Arlo, I am in tears. The longing for the MOQ that is contained within your words is breathtaking. DQ/SQ, the longing is DQ, no way to define it. I wish, in some way, that evolution could be explored with the same reverence for Pirsig's endeavors.
Joe On 4/11/11 12:04 PM, "Dan Glover" <[email protected]> wrote: <snip> >> Arlo: >> To clarify, I'd say that Pirsig's ideas don't evolve (unless HE changes his >> mind or something), but the overall foundation he built does evolve as other >> voices contribute and disagree, etc. Again, the issue is not whether the one >> (Pirsig's voice) is better/worse than the many (other voices in response), >> but which of these you call "The MOQ". All along you've been saying the >> former (Pirsig's voice) is "The MOQ", but this doesn't change, and can't >> evolve (unless he does). > > Dan: > Yes, I think I agree. Which is why (in my opinion) he may have used > the term "the MOQ says" rather than "I say" or "Robert Pirsig says." > In this way, he is lending a Dynamic Quality to his work that allows > it to evolve and change for the better, whereas a purely static "I > say" is bound to wither, grow old, and die eventually. > > Intellectually, the MOQ is Robert Pirsig's idea. And as this is an > intellectual discussion of that idea, we should attempt to be > consistent with it, even as we Dynamically attempt to enhance it and > expand it. <snip> 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
