Dan to Joe:

"Dynamic Quality is the pre-intellectual cutting edge of reality, the
source of all things, completely simple and always new." [Lila]

So if this isn't useful I am unsure what part of the MOQ is useful.
This seems like the foundation of it all. I get the feeling a number
of contributors here believe we all should just make it up as we go
along.

Andre:
Hi Dan, Joe. You are making an important point here Dan, which, I believe, 
cannot be stressed too frequently. A 'number of contributors' indeed devote 
their posts entirely attempting to describe Quality in better ways (according 
to them) than Pirsig did. Resulting in the usual drivel. They maintain that 
Pirsig's ZMM and LILA is a DESCRIPTION of Quality. I think this misses the 
point entirely. ZMM and LILA are an attempt at EXPLAINING Quality...by analogy, 
by metaphor, through koan.

Nowhere does Pirsig describe Quality in any detailed way. Not that I have found 
anyway. And if someone argues that the above quote from LILA IS a description 
I'd like to know WHAT it describes!

I'm interested to hear your response to this Dan.

Also, what needs to be understood is that Quality is not a 'part' of the MoQ, 
it is not a metaphysical chess piece. Even though, at times, used 
interchangeably with Dynamic Quality it is important to remember that DQ within 
the MOQ is a referring term which denotes the 'unconceptualised part of 
reality'.

Dan:
I am operating under the(perhaps mistaken) assumption that we are here to 
discuss Robert
Pirsig's work and in particular the MOQ as described in Lila... are we not?

Andre:
And I echo your sentiments Dan. It is annoying to say the least to have posters 
here who think they can outsmart Pirsig and be downright insulting to Anthony 
who devoted his PhD to it (not without being constructively critical about the 
MoQ in some areas).
This has nothing to do with following dogma. It has everything to do with 
reaching a better understanding of Pirsig's MoQ and finding out/realizing, 
again and again why the MoQ is such a high quality static intellectual pattern 
of value.

And thank goodness for the fact that it does stand the way it 
is...static/stable. If that would not have been the case, and 'a number of 
contributors' would have (had) their way, it would have disappeared 15 years 
ago.


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

Reply via email to