[David] Not social value. I think above all else Marsha values DQ. DQ is also outside of intellectual value and logic.
[Arlo] I think this is generous, but wrong. For two main reasons. First, "dynamic quality" is the source of intellectual quality. It is not an "either/or" option, it is not "intellectual quality OR dynamic quality", Pirsig's intellectual thesis was built by Pirsig 'valuing' DQ (I'm using your way of speaking here, but I find wordings like this cumbersome and redundant). What is valued intellectually all derives from the impetus towards 'betterness'. Think of it this way, 'coherence' IS Dynamic Quality manifest at the intellectual level. Being coherent is not in opposition to DQ, any more than being harmonious is something musicians should deliberately avoid just because its 'a static pattern'. Second, there a hundreds of more "DQish" forums around the internet, from Zen lists to lists about poetry and art and lists devoted to sharing free-form, unstructured 'words'. If this was simply a rejection of all 'intellectual values' under the auspice that such a rejection was ipso facto 'artistic' or 'DQish', why is she here, in a philosophy forum, built around the premise of intellectual quality and Pirsig's ideas. As I said, Marsha is here for social quality, and I include under that umbrella the psycho-egotistical roleplay that she gets out of 'being Lila'. I've already mentioned the baiting and evidence of attention seeking in the increased frequency of "I define..." posts. Do you think that is following Dynamic Quality? If she genuinely was pursuing "DQ" this forum wouldn't even make its way into her awareness, she'd be off sculpting, or painting, or making rotisseries, or writing koans, or meditating, or any of the myriad of activities that she seems to think are clo ser to DQ than wasting time on intellectual quality. To join a philosophy forum to tell everyone that philosophy is pedantic is rather arrogant and, from the MOQ's perspective, stuck in an SOM view of intellectual quality. [David] Like all intellectual values - what we deem logical or illogical is culturally derived. [Arlo] Agree. [David] To the extent that we are each our own values - we will each have our own sense of what is and is not 'logical'. [Arlo] I'll agree in part, although I think 'have our own sense' needs some unpacking and clarification. Perhaps you mean although we all share the same basic understanding of the word, we will generate nuances to how we understand it based on our ontogenetic and sociohistorical development. Although I don't think 'nuancical' differences in understanding 'logic' are at play here. What I think is at play is the SOM-driven rejection of ALL intellectual patterns versus the MOQ-driven expansion of rationality to move beyond SOM on the intellectual level. Compare the 'rhetoric' between Marsha and DMB. DMB attacks incoherence (whether or not you agree with his manners), whereas Marsha attacks philosophy itself. DMB attacks contradictions, Marsha attacks DMB for talking about James or pragmatism or, basically, for what she miscontrues as 'philosophology'. DMB is trying to strengthen the intellectual level, Marsha is trying to destroy the intellectual level. When you look beyond their heated choices of words, that is the pattern that comes out time and time again. To be fair, I've found Marsha's comments relating to eastern philosophies interesting, and I think Pirsig's ideas can be strengthened by aligning his ideas with the East in the same way DMB is aligning his ideas with the West. These are, in and of themselves, not incompatible, and even a cursory read of Northrop can see why Pirsig himself tried to forge a bridge. But, again, look back over the archives and you'll see that DMB is not condemning or dismissing Nargarjuna (for example), he is condemning and dismissing incoherence. Marsha, on the other hand, IS condemning or dismissing James (or at best passing it off as irrelevant but quaint for a simpleton like DMB to find interesting). Again, look over what they are attacking in each other behind the heated rhetoric, and you'll see this specific tension over and over in the archives. 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
