From: Joe (jhmau@sbcglobal.net)
Date: Thu May 08 2003 - 17:53:18 BST
Hi Matt,
I am very sorry for quoting you as saying something you never said. I am
sorry! Sorry! Sorry! I should remember when I try to put words into some's
else's mouth I fall flat on my lips.
> Joe,
>
> Joe said:
> SOM makes a distinction in 'existence' to create subjective and objective
> words (if we wish to talk to each other.) Does Pirsig fall into a similar
> trap by making a distinction in 'quality'? Do we have 'subjective'
quality
> dq (indefianble), and 'objective' quality sq (definable static-latched
dq)?
>
> My impression is that Matt E would say: "Yes he does, so forget it."
Matt:
Well now, wait a second. Never have a bashed the distinction that Pirsig
draws in Lila. Compared to the usual list of Greek dichotomies, I like the
distinction between dynamic and static. The mistake that I think Pirsig
makes is attempting to do metaphysics. I see him as hypostatizing (as
paradoxical as it looks) his distinction. In this case, both the MoQ and
SOM, then, fall into similar modern philosophical problems. I think that
Pirsig probably evades a subjective/objective distinction, but I don't think
he evades an appearance/reality distinction.
joe: if dq is seen as an aspect of the sq pattern I think the
appearance/reality distinction is also eliminated.
Again Thank You! for not letting me keep slumbering.
Joe
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 : Thu May 08 2003 - 17:50:44 BST