glove, you say that youre lurking and watching to see if any other
notions make sense, but i don't think that you, any of you, are really
being open minded about this. Couldn't Quality just be subjective after
all? why must Quality be capitalized in your minds? it was just pirsig's
pov, not some manifest truth that you are all now bound to. Why must
pirsig be right? why did he write you a bible as opposed to a philosophy
book? a pov? well, listen; i used to believe in the MoQ notions as
undoubtingly as you all seem to, and with as much fervor (my final
philosophy paper for high school is set to be a dissertation on the MoQ)
but i am now almost completely disillusioned. i love his ideas, but i
cant get past the idea that quality is more than subjective opinion.
glove, it seems to me that this answer makes the most sense. i know that
this may be unheard of on this mailing list, and i am still just an
uneducated newbie 17 yearold who carries no sway or respect, but i think
that i actually outright disagree with the founder of this philosophy.
either i have a lot to learn or you have all lost sight of the fragility
of philosophies. But, please, if any of you still can, pull me back onto
the same wavelength. prove to me that Q isn't subjective or at all
classifieable in the old SOM. after all, i do still have to do a paper
on this philosophy, so i might as well adhere to it. that might make it
a higher quality paper.
homepage - http://www.moq.org
queries - mailto:moq@moq.org
unsubscribe - mailto:majordomo@moq.org with UNSUBSCRIBE MOQ_DISCUSS in
body of email
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:45 BST