Hi Bo, LilaQs,
Bo, I consider your message totally arrogant and out of place:-
<<<I really wonder about you - Struan. What good do you see in Pirsig's
ideas at all? After the "Theo Schramm" performance you disappeared
and made a great show over at the Sci Phil Meta. of refuting Pirsig.
Now you are back again delivering a few "credentials" of the
value of the MOQ, but soon flaunting how much better Mr Hellier
knows, and how wrongly Pirsig has understood it all. Most of the
squad hate the unpleasantness that results from contradicting you, I
do so too, but it would soon exhaust our resources to have you
roaming freely picking on this and that - not because it
misinterprets Pirsig, but for being in disagreement with Struan
Hellier's philosophy. I suggest that you remove yourself to sites
that are for such activities.>>>
May I humbly suggest, Bodvar, that you play the ball and not the man. I
don't agree with everything Struan Hellier writes, but he does make his
points logically and with dignity. I was PLEASED to see Struan back in
the discussion. If we are to make any progress, a critical and testing
attitude to Pirsig's MoQ is not only welcome, but essential. Furthermore
Bodvar, it is highly hypocritical of you to accuse others for dismissing
or contradicting aspects of Pirsig's philosophy.
Bodvar Skutvik <skutvik@online.no>
Date: Monday, January 25, 1999 12:30 PM
Subject: Re: MD LEVELS & S/O Metaphysics
<<<The MOQ is the static levels - Intellect included - and that is why I
want the Q idea to be something transcending Intellect. The MOQ is
open-ended at the top, but closed at the bottom. It sounds
preposterous, considering the time perspective, that now, a mere
blink of an eye after the Intellect has established itself, the
Dynamism is about to break Intellect's rules, but I see no other way
unless Intellect becomes "it all" much like good old mind.>>>
Open-ended? Where does that come from?
Pirsig (Ch. 12 of Lila):-
<<<In this plain of understanding static patterns of value are divided
into four systems: inorganic patterns, biological patterns, social
patterns and intellectual patterns. They are exhaustive. That's all
there are. In you construct an encyclopedia of four topics - Inorganic,
Biological, Social and Intellectual - nothing is left out. No "thing,"
that is. Only Dynamic Quality, which cannot be described in any
encyclopedia, is absent.>>>
Bodvar, to call the 4-levels "open ended" seems to me an outright
contradiction of the "all-encompassing" levels Pirsig describes in the
paragraph I have quoted. You claim to represent MoQ orthodoxy i.e. a
static and literal interpretation of Pisrig's written works, yet you
freely go ahead and propose a deviant Metaphysics of Bodvar (MOB).
Let me (playfully) prescribe some of your own medicine
... it would soon exhaust our resources to have you
roaming freely picking on this and that - not because it
misinterprets Pirsig, but for being in disagreement with Bodvar
Skutnik's MOB philosophy. I suggest that you remove yourself to sites
that are for such activities.
How did that taste Bodvar? Now drink up like a good boy and stop playing
the nanny.
Jonathan
MOQ Homepage - http://www.moq.org
Mailing List Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Queries - mailto:moq@moq.org
Unsubscribe - mailto:majordomo@moq.org with
UNSUBSCRIBE MOQ_DISCUSS in the body of the email
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:50 BST