Quoting MarshaV <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > At 04:08 PM 3/10/2007, Platt wrote: > >Quoting MarshaV <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > > > I should have left things at the above > > > statement. It's not called the Metaphysics of > > > Betterness, "betterness" is just a very confusing > > > term. The way I read the quotes that you sited > > > were that "betterness" is the movement towards > > > Dynamic Quality that will provide for getting > > > unstuck. The "betterness" is the > > > unstuckness. But, Dynamic Quality is still > > > amoral in my book, not good, not bad, not > > > betterness, not any definition. And if good is a > > > noun (a static pattern of value), so is bad a > > > noun. Only a hand-written explanation from > > > Pirsig, himself, will convince me otherwise. > > > >Hand written by Pirsig himself in Chap. 7 of Lila: > > > >"Because Quality is morality. Make no mistake about it. They're identical. > >And if Quality is the primary reality of the world then that means morality > >is also the primary reality of the world. The world is primarily a > >moral order." > > > >Arlo is right. DQ is about "betterness." > > Greetings Platt, > > You cannot define as moral that which cannot be defined. According > to Pirsig, Dynamic Quality cannot be defined.
Hi Marsha, DQ and SQ are conjoined with Quality. Only for the sake of intellect are they treated separately. You can no more separate DQ from Quality than you can separate a word from its meaning. ------------------------------------------------- This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/ 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.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
