It is with great trepidation that I chime in here. Krimel is over there in the corner in the fetal position. Between the word count per post and post count per diem, he just can't do the math.
Does the 24 hour clock start on midnight Greenwich Mean Time or local time? Is it four posts within any given 24 hours? Did the clock start three posts ago? Does Krimel get four per day and I get four per day or is it four posts per day per hypothetical User? As we recall the last time the rule was invoked it led to someone being cast into the outer darkness. I am cool with that and Krimel says he can stand the gnashing of teeth but the wailing keeps him up at night. Since I have the lowest total post count I have been ordered to risk appearing before the tribunal. I would like to reduce our collective risk and keep it short. I think all or most of the comments of yesterday can be answered in just a minute and 44 sec. right here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dRxCJJvSeKM But on the assumption that will not be sufficient, in no particular order here goes: [Ron] Yes though it may be relevant that man creates value, it should not be lost that value in everyway also creates man. This is a very important factor. [Case] If by this you mean man and value are in a feedback loop, flowing into and out of each other, Roger that. [dmb] Or do you not understand what counts as "textual evidence"? [Case] Krimel says he will gladly start a thread on hermeneutics when the post count clears. In the meantime, he recommends Hans George Gadamer's "Truth and Method." There is a great historical overview in "PART II: The extension of the question of truth to understanding in the human sciences." If you need a copy call him. [dmb] Is that because, as you claimed yesterday, chaos and Dynamic Quality are equivalent? [Case] No, it is because I think chaos a term that can legitimately be applied to the dynamic aspect of Quality along with the others that were mentioned. [dmb] I think it's simply a way of saying that static patterns provide stability and chaos is a total lack of this stability. He's not saying that DQ is chaos. [Case] I think we can agree that Pirsig wants to avoid the term chaos. But I think it is just as clear that he doesn't understand the term. He sees the chaos Carrie was talking about. But what Pirsig describes is exactly what I have called chaos and what Nietzsche calls chaos. "Static quality, the moral force of the priests, emerges in the wake of Dynamic Quality." Without that moral force, "The whole Zuni culture, after thousands of years of continuous survival, would collapse into chaos." To which Koheleth might add, "Dust thou art and to dust thou shalt return." Chaos does NOT mean a total lack of stability. Stability arises from and remains a part of chaos. Just as Pirsig invents the static and dynamic aspects of Quality. See: http://www.radiolab.org/2009/jun/15/ [dmb] DQ is freedom. [Case] Oopsie, I think you just broke the first rule of MoQ Club. Freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose. It opens to us on the day we are born and is fulfilled in our last breath. It isn't good It isn't bad It's Being. [dmb] And the defensive patterns referred to in the quote above is what made her so unstable. She's just oblivious to the static patterns of everyday life. She can't discern the difference between sociopathic street thugs and "great people". Social and intellectual static quality are both "outside her range" and that's why she "missed the whole point of everything". That's why "Lila's religion of one doesn't have a chance." (Lila 372) She's suffering from a lack of order, the result of which is degeneracy and chaos. [Case] On this point I agree entirely with B.F. Skinner, ritual is the result of random reinforcement. But you seem to be saying that the dynamic aspect of her character is lack of order, degeneracy and chaos. We may not be as far apart as it appears. [dmb] Lila is an example of what can happen when static quality is lacking. She is an example of what we DON'T want for ourselves or others. [Case] Exactly, Lila is captive to the dynamic aspect of Quality. So was the Madman of ZMM. Both exemplify and stand in as symbols of this dynamic aspect. You are correct, it is not what we want. You are also correct that to the extent that the static aspect of Quality is missing what remains is disorder and confusion. This I think was Pirsig's point. Mental illness, as described in both Pirsig's characters is not something people have and then get over. It is not something they are suddenly and temporarily driven to. It is a permanent condition, not at all like a cold. These narratives do not describe the characters as "catching" something from which they can expect a full recovery. The incidents in both stories are of people intermittently lost to madness. This dynamic aspect stretches both backward and forward from the incidents we are asked to consider. [Ant] DMB's post about this issue (from yesterday) really put paid to any notion of using the term "irrational" as a synonym for Dynamic Quality. [Case] I realize that dmb's point was too weak to stand on its own but you are hardly helping. As the aspect of Quality that defies definition, Quality is never-the-less amenable to phenomenological description. Pirsig does this both explicitly and implicitly throughout his novels. [Ant] DMB's suggestions of "pre-conceptual" and "pre-intellectual" are far better as they retain the benefits of using the term "irrational" but without the negative connotations. [Case] This is the point Krimel was addressing when he said, ". my problem with the term Dynamic Quality is exactly that. It is loaded with baggage and in my view baggage whose contents are just as deceptive for being pleasant as irrational's are for seeming harsh." You can't pretend you are not defining something because you define what is not or your description one sided. [Ant] . you have to be careful about associating any (static) properties (such as being irrational or rational) to Dynamic Quality. [Case] But you have no problem doing exactly that. As I said in my Coda: You can call it irrational, You can call it the cutting edge or A dim apprehension. But whatever tales you hear when calling it by name. If some of them aren't nightmares, you're kidding yourself. All I hear you and dmb saying is that you have trouble facing the dynamic aspect of Quality without a silver lining. [Ant] As you've admitted in a recent post, you've not read much secondary literature about the MOQ. [Case] Let's be true to the "textual evidence." Krimel said of Pirsig, "he has had very little to say about it for more than 20 years." He is familiar with the writing you mention and in their sum, they are exactly his point. [Ant] The moment you say something about it, it's wrong. [Case] And yet neither you nor dmb show much reluctance to speak of it. But only in terms of your choosing. Only as "happy talk." [Ant] This is also why Dave's suggestion of looking at synonyms of Dynamic Quality (such as the Tao or Northrop's "indeterminate aesthetic continuum") is a good one. [Case] And yet, you and he reserve some privilege to choose the synonyms? [Ant] Moreover, if you are going to load a post with philosophology, it would be helpful if you could provide proper details of the articles and books that you are referring to. As one of the articles in one of the links that you provided to DMB advises. [Case] Krimel realizes that dmb's point was too weak to stand on its own but Krimel and I have many times acknowledged our poor powers of proof reading. Still, if English Nazi is all you have I guess you should run with it. This new requirement that we now attach works cited with our posts raises new questions. Should these be attached at the end of our posts and risk exceeding the word count or as separate posts and risk violation of the per diem? My tips were submitted to assist dmb to finding a more effect way to use "textual evidence." The suggestion was made in response to a post that had a total 1040 words; 579 from dmb and 464 from Pirsig and Nietzsche. While this is well short a plagiarism, as I said, it is not a good ratio. My comments on Husserl are mainly from the "Crisis in European Sciences" and from Nietzsche's "The Gay Science." If you need page numbers just ask. You also stray from the "textual evidence" when you say Krimel portrayed, "DMB as a "journeyman" and Pirsig as "looking [like] a talented amateur"! Krimel said of dmb's attempt to link Pirsig to Nietzsche's star (and I would add, his attempts to link Pirsig to James), leaves "...your version of Pirsig looking a talented amateur, clueless of his subject matter." I don't read Pirsig that way but if I were familiar only with dmb's caricature that would be the impression I would get. I thought I was very careful to be clear about that. It is not Pirsig, I have problems with. It is dmb's interpretation, which I find degrades Pirsig's work. While we are on the subject. [dmb] If someone asked, could you say what the point was? [Case] I assumed the point was to impress the folks over at Practical Philosophy. Or perhaps to impress us without actually having to write anything new. If there was another point, perhaps if it had been sharper I might have noticed it. You have shown a much greater tendency toward a civil conversation of late and I have no desire to waste time along these lines so I am happy to leave it there. But make no mistake my critique and my warning stand. If you want to put that football on the ground again, I know exactly where to kick it. Anyway, until the post count clears or gets clarified, I'm out until 4:50 am, my time, I think. Until then, we both look forward to more productive dialogue in the future. 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
