Wim, Rick and all: Wim said: Is it THE MoQ we are discussing (i.e. as meant by Pirsig) or are we (should we be) discussing the merits of our various versions (with Pirsig's writings expressing only one version or even a version that develops in time)? ..This is NOT meant as merely a suggestion for a rule that should guide our behaviour on this list (and MD)...Please understand it primarily as a discussion about the nature of the MoQ. ...So, please don't merely give an opinion on whether the MoQ we are discussing is merely the result of Pirsig's activities or of our collective activities.
Rick replied: That's where you lose me Wim. Are you asking whether the MoQ states whether or not we are or should be discussing Pirsig's MoQ or our own MoQ? That formulation seems problematic. In fact, from the following quote, it appears to me that what you really wanted to ask was if the MoQ is an intellectual pattern... But this last sentence is almost precisely the question you asked. Am I wrong Wim? Should the question be rephrased as: Is the MoQ an intellectual pattern? That seems to be the issue you're putting your weight down in the above argument. dmb says: Ouch. My brain hurts. Is the question about the validity of alternative versions of the MOQ, is it about the MOQ itself, is it about how we should discuss the MOQ or is it about SOLAQI? These are all very different questions and so asking them all at once is contradictory and incoherent. Even if Wim hadn't spun the question beyond recognition, it would still be confusing. I mean, its hard to imagine how to answer the question. If I understand it, the question DOES NOT ask if it is appropriate to create our own metaphysical system. (Of course it is.) It asks if it is appropriate to plagarize and distort Pirsig's MOQ. I can't quite put my finger on it, but get a feeling that something is very, very wrong here. There is something morally outrageous about the very notion. I mean, has anyone ever heard of Frankenstien's theory of relativity? No, because that would be cheating Einstien. It would be intellectually dishonest. It would be theft and a lie. Its Einstein's theory wether we like it or not. Is it appropriate for a person to create their own theory in physics? Of course it is. But if one calls it the theory of relativity, no one can be blamed for thinking such a name refers to Einstein's ideas. And if one compounds this crime by inventing new definitions for Einstien's key concepts and terms,... Its just wrong on so many levels. And so it is with Pirsig's MOQ. I believe such a practice is way past being unhelpful and enters the realm of intellectual vandalism. As you may have detected, dear reader, this is a sore spot for me. As I see it, the question is basically about getting permission to smash Pirsig's work until if fits our preconcieved notions. I think this is some kind of minor evil. MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_focus/ MF Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from moq_focus follow the instructions at: http://www.moq.org/mf/subscribe.html
