Re: MD About Quality.

Date: Wed Feb 19 2003 - 21:22:03 GMT

  • Next message: Matt the Enraged Endorphin: "Re: MD About Quality."

    Squonk: Now hold on a moment. This is exceptionally poor. You have, i notice,
    totally ignored the insertions i made in my previous reply. This may be
    because they are fatal to your project? So, here they are again (numbered)
    for you to respond to:

    Matt: But if you wanted one example of what I think I may have helpfully
    out to some people, it is that Quality is not an essence. It is an

    Sq: 1. Essences belong in a substance based metaphysics. The MoQ is not a
    substance based metaphysics.

    Matt: The thought following from that is that, if metaphysics is
    the search for essences, then we should stop doing metaphysics because we
    will never find any essences.

    Sq: 2. If is a big word. Back in the world of the MoQ, which, if you will
    forgive me treading dangerously close to the crumbling edge of the obvious,
    is an appropriate concern of mine, and i quote: " exists to provide a
    forum for discussion and study of the Metaphysics of Quality as proposed by
    Robert M Pirsig in his books Lila: An Inquiry into Morals and Zen and the Art
    of Motorcycle Maintenance" because that's the name of the forum.

    Matt: When Pirsig historicized Quality in Lila, he
    made explicit that Quality was an existent, he made it something that
    evolves over time. In this way, he resembles Dewey who suggested that we
    think of experience and nature as quasi-synonymous and that when we ask,
    "What evolves?" we answer "experience."

    Sq: 3. Static patterns evolve towards DQ. DQ does not evolve. Experience
    composed of static patterns evolves, but DQ is unpatterned.

    Matt: Isn't that what Pirsig's doing when he constructs
    SOM and compares the MoQ to it?
    Isn't SOM just the picture Pirsig's drawn
    out of the materials supplied by the books he's read, like Kant and Boas?
    Isn't he just doing literary criticism when he does that?

    Sq: 4. No. There are patterns of thinking that are so abstract they move
    beyond literature. These patterns may be embedded in literature, they may
    appear in metaphor, but the abstractions are not within the purview of
    ordinary culture. Even then, they may be questioned on higher levels - the
    levels Quality appears as Pirsig first saw it. SoM is a construction along
    the way, but its not Pirsig's construction as such; its too deep. Your
    mucking about doesn't go near.


    MOQ.ORG -
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 -
    Nov '02 Onward -
    MD Queries -

    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Feb 19 2003 - 21:22:38 GMT