>How does one explain the Metaphysics of Quality in 45 minutes 
>or less to people who have never heard of it? That is, how 
>does one reduce the MOQ to a catechism?
Good question.  I'm going to step out on a limb here...  This approach 
has had some success with "normal" coach potato intellectuals.  A 
description first... 
Basically, this approach is almost a reversal of the way Pirsig 
introduced us to MoQ -- it starts with a description/general explanation 
of the static patterns of quality, initially not named.  The use of an 
example here really works well -- any of the typical social-intellectual 
(or whatever fits) "conflicts" not only show something the current view 
of the listener can't currently explain, but almost serves as a "hook" 
to the listener.  90% of the time, an "oh, that makes sense -- maybe 
this MoQ thing is worth looking into" look results -- and with that 
follows genuine interest.  Then, name those static patterns and build to 
the notion of Dynamic Quality -- easily (initially) explained as a 
source of change.  Now, depending on the interest of the listener, they 
almost expect the primary, undefined Quality that RMP introduces in ZMM.  
>From here, anything can follow -- the advantages of the MoQ analogy of 
reality compared with the Sub/Obj description, the 
explanation/determination of morality/values that the MoQ allows, etc.  
Now, my criticism...
My first concern with this approach is that it is simplistic, hence a 
"degraded" understanding by the listener.  
My second, and more significant, objection is that this explanation 
employs SOM [sub/obj] to express MoQ -- is this a fundamental 
contradiction/flaw, an asset due to the fact that the listener employs 
SOM at the time, or some other problem?  I must admit I still have 
problems with SOM in my personal views at times, but I must wonder if a 
compromise for the sake of comprehension is a good idea...  I get the 
feeling we'll be talking about this one for a while.
Third, the listener loses much of the wonderful insight and thought that 
RMP employed throughout 841 pages (paperback) that gave a "feeling" 
about Quality -- a deep, gut feeling that greatly helped my 
understanding.  Unfortunately, I doubt anything can recreate (cloning?  
:-) that experience for our listener.   
I've twaddled for more than my share tonight, so let me know what you 
think.  I'm looking forward to this month -- very interesting topic.  
Hmm... surprised I have the gonads to write on the first day.  
Have a good one,
Boone
MOQ Online - http://www.moq.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Jan 17 2002 - 13:08:38 GMT