[Platt] What is lacking in our exchange as it has been with others on this site is an agreed upon definition of the levels. I submit this is yet another example of the value of defining one's terms. What's involved is a moral issue since it is better to have a common understanding of a word or phrase than to be misunderstood.
[Ron] I really don't think you can solidly and absolutly define levels which inter-depend on one another. I really see no way around the issue other than focusing on the intent between descriptor And interpretor and make the relationship between the communicators the primary value. The more I learn the more I see that "common understanding" is a body of generalized concepts And when you start getting into the specifics it becomes less and less common. Pirsig did'nt spell it out because it can not be spelled out and isolated by level. The levels function as a whole not individually thus they can not be defined absolutley only through their realionships with the other levels. ------------------------------------------------- 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/ 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/
