[Arlo] You (along with Marsha) continue to conflate this interaction/oscillation (whatever analogy you prefer) into just static quality.
[DM] so you say, I am questioning why this makes you so uncomfortable [Arlo] It doesn't make me 'uncomfortable', this is a philosophy forum, isn't it? If this is simply a support group where we're supposed to nod and accept every incoherent statement thrown out, then maybe I am in the wrong place. And, I think the statement reveals a basic misunderstanding of Pirsig's central ideas. If we are here to discuss Pirsig's ideas, you would think that evidence of this misunderstanding is pretty darn important. [DM] I'd say sure make the distinction clear one moment, and then qualify it with transitional moments where the distinction collapses, where sq and dq appear together or morph from one into the other.. [Arlo] And this is just more of that confusion, David. Here, I'm not sure we can even continue a dialogue. You say things like this and its pretty clear you either don't understand the basics of Pirsig's ideas, or you are off talking about ideas that not his. DQ and SQ do not 'morph' into one another. I've provided three separate quotations from LILA showing that these are metaphysically distinct categories. [Arlo previously] "But Dynamic Quality is not structured and yet it is not chaotic. It is value that cannot be contained by static patterns." (LILA) "The force of evolutionary creation [DQ] isn't contained by substance [sq]. Substance [sq] is just one kind of static pattern left behind by the creative force [DQ]." (LILA) "... there's a Dynamic good [DQ] that is outside of any culture, that cannot be contained by any system of precepts [sq]..." (LILA) [Arlo] So either you're disagreeing with Pirsig, or you think you have a better metaphysics, or you've descended down into that realm where words don't matter, nothing has any real meaning, and we can pretty much say anything and no one is every right or wrong about anything. [DM] do we not recognise that all patterns are open to change [Arlo] All static patterns are capable of responding to Dynamic Quality. The 'train' has a 'leading edge'. THIS is not the source of the problem, David. The source of the problem is conflating evolution [change] into static quality. "Static patterns evolve in response to Dynamic Quality." <== this is not the problem. "Static patterns are ever-changing." <== this is the problem. Every time you respond to the problem by simply restating what is not the problem. So there is nothing more I can say. 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
