From: Scott Roberts (jse885@earthlink.net)
Date: Wed Nov 17 2004 - 20:26:24 GMT
Simon,
> Just wondering, has Pirsig written anything that you don't think is
wrong?
I agree that Quality is fundamental, and that the later levels are more
moral than the earlier one, in that they are more Dynamic. I also find
great value in Pirsig's discussions of technology in ZAMM, his analysis of
the Giant in Lila, etc.
> Also, saying that DQ is Reason destroys the MOQ immediately and
> comprehensively. It is like going on an Einstein.org Forum and saying
that,
> actually, e does not equal mc squared.
My argument has been that value implies consciousness and intellect, that
they should all be considered three names for the same (non)-thing. There
is no value without appreciation of value, and no discerning of better and
worse without intellect, that "static patterns of value" are not
appreciated as patterns, nor can they be compared to other patterns,
without intellect. This does not imply that such intellect is human
intellect, or even S/O-style intellect. I've said this several times, and
have not heard a convincing rebuttal, so give it a shot.
- Scott
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Nov 17 2004 - 20:52:23 GMT