Focusers, In ZAMM, Pirsig argues that Quality is undefineable and thus cannot be put in words and therefore urges the reader to comprehend Quality through directly experiencing the Good, as distinguished from the True which can be known in part by direct experience as well as the knowledge of the times. The MOQ is a rational approach of comprehending Reality, and therefore Quality, which is the primary empirical reality as stated in the MOQ in Lila. In order to define it, Quality is split into two counterparts: DQ and SQ. SQ is defined as "static patterns of value" that evolve into higher and higher quality of static patterns from the lowest ie inorganic (matter), biological, social to the highest- intellectual. DQ, although undefinable, is described as the creative force, moral force or the preintellectual cutting edge of Reality - in short the driving factor in the evolution of all static patterns. Although fairly simple in its form and consistent in theory, when this model is applied for its designated primary purpose -an inquiry into morals, it leads to a host of problems that primarily arise from one major problem that Pirsig has not touched upon : How does an individual living being (self) fit into all this ? If we operate from the belief that there is no such thing as the self, and that Quality or Reality is one undifferentiated continumm , then where comes the question of choice, freedom ,good, morals ? - all these concepts collapse into nothing, and MOQ is reduced to being ONLY a "feel good" Metaphysics of Mysticism in which all is good and there is no right or wrong. According to this, evolution in all respects should follow a linear progression by itself, without any setbacks or reversals since DQ as an evolving force is complete and fully present at all times. Which leads to another problem in the MOQ : MOQ does not throw any light on the duality of concepts and beliefs. That is it says nothing on a basic truth of all existence which is: For a conception to exist there has to be a counterconcept, for every belief there is also a counterbelief. For there to be Good there must also be "not Good" , for there to be moral , there has to be immoral. Which brings up another problem : Since all conceptions, beliefs and their counters are aspects of Perception ,Can "static patterns of value" have any existence outside Perception? And yet "static patterns of value" are talked about in MOQ forums AS IF these have existence INDEPENDENT of the perceptions of distinct individual selfs ! These are fundamental problems arising out of oversimplification and sacrificing completeness for the sake of consistency. Bobby _____________________________________________________________________________________ Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com MOQ.org - http://www.moq.org
