Matt said: The problem I was attempting to elucidate is whether or not a _particular_ set of intellectual patterns can get in the way of Reality/DQ better or worse than another.
DMB said: And THE POINT here is that the MOQ is a rival set of glasses, one that's meant to replace SOM because of the way it largely ignores and excludes DQ. The problem (SOM) is being out of touch with DQ and the MOQ is the solution to that problem. Matt: Okay, but what do you do with what I think is a correct perception of Pirsig that Pirsig also wants to say that we are never disconnected from DQ? You elaborated well the one side of Pirsig that suggests that SOM is in an important sense between us and DQ (via the glasses analogy), but what do you do with the notion that one of Pirsig's first metaphysical moves is to collapse the (SOM) distinction between experience and reality, in order to say that we are never, actually, out of touch with reality, even if we had thought we were (again, via the glasses analogy--reality was always there, even if we thought it was blue, and not the better color, green). Isn't there a sense in which Pirsig is suggesting that SOM's problems are fake, illusions, rice-traps we stumbled into? Or is that one of the things you count as a misinterpretation? Matt 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
