[Eddo asks:] Are the good guys, on this forum, only discussing pirsig's interpretation of moq?
[Arlo] Pirsig did not author an 'interpretation of moq'. Pirsig's metaphysics are, if anything, his interpretation of *experience*. We are here to discuss Pirsig's ideas, yes. You can disagree, to be sure, and you can suggest a better 'interpretation' of experience than the MOQ. But as with any intellectual endeavor, you should want to be very clear about what Pirsig (or anyone) has said, so that you can formulate and articulate agreement/disagreement. I throw this example out most times when accusations of 'dogma' start flying (always by those who want to 'interpret' Pirsig to mean something he clearly did not). That is, I disagree (strongly) with Pirsig's stance that the social and intellectual levels are reserved for human activity. I could make a very strong argument that many non-human species evidence social activity, and others evidence rudimentary intellectual activity. The thing is, Eddo, this is not "my interpretation of the MOQ". This is me understanding what Pirsig said and taking a point of active disagreement. I have never once been 'shouted down' or attacked by 'the choir' for voicing this disagreement. 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
