[David]
The 'Cosmic' Lila described here, like the Lila in the book clearly do not 
value 'staticness'.  To them static is evil.   They all follow another kind of 
good which is completely different to static good..

[Arlo]
In LILA, Pirsig points out the Hippie movement failed because: The Hippie 
rejection of social and intellectual patterns left just two directions to go: 
toward biological quality and toward Dynamic Quality. The revolutionaries of 
the sixties thought that since both are anti-social, and since both are 
anti-intellectual, why then they must both be the same. That was the mistake.

Lila, the character, also rejects static patterns, but how do you see her 
trajectory as being different than the hippies? How do you see her pursuit as 
avoid the mistake of the hippies? How do you see Lila, the character, pursing 
Dynamic Quality but the Hippies pursuing biological quality? Can you offer me 
reasons to support your implied position that Lila was a mystic of some sort, 
and not, like the hippies, confusing biological and Dynamic Quality. 

[David]
This Dynamic Quality - good and evil - is supported by the Code of Art in the 
MOQ.

[Arlo]
Can you give me examples in LILA where Lila pursues a "Code of Art"?

[David]
"This last, the Dynamic-static code, says what's good in life isn't defined by 
society or intellect or biology. What's good is freedom from domination by any 
static pattern, but that freedom doesn't have to be obtained by the destruction 
of the patterns themselves."

[Arlo]
Doesn't this apply to the Hippies as well? Why would Pirsig characterize their 
'freedom from domination by any static pattern' as a mistake, and if it was a 
mistake, how does Lila avoid that mistake?

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