> Steve replied to Dave: > I don't disagree with Pirsig or the dictionary as far as the "classic > dilemma." >I disagree with how YOU think this dilemma could possibly still come up in the >MOQ while Pirsig specifically says this dilemma does not come up in the MOQ!
Ron: Bob specifically states that when we follow Dynamic Quality we are free. He states that natural selection aka evolution is dynamic quality at work, which is what touched this whole pissing match off. What you Steve seem to insist on, is that free-will or dynamic quality as re-named by Pirsigs MoQ, can not be or should not be talked about. Yet we see how he connects the two concepts not as diametrically opposed but as a cohesive total explanation. What would be a more relevent and meaningful discussion on the MD but a discussion involving deterministic static patterns and their freedom to evolve? How does the denial and rejection of a dilemma ever solved or "dissolved"? not by avoiding it or ignoring it as a non-issue but by it's explanation, and the power that lies in Pirsigs MoQ is explanitory not negation. The Dilemma is disolved by explanation, not ignoring the debate entirely as meaningless. Only rigid pricks do 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
