Doug Renselle (renselle@on-net.net)
Thu, 29 Jan 1998 18:17:32 +0100
Hi Diana,
See comments below -
Diana McPartlin wrote:
>
...
> For what it's worth my solution to the hot stove example was to say
> that
> it's not that he perceives the hot stove as low quality, it's that he
> perceives that getting off the stove is high quality. In other words
> the
> urge to get off the stove is the Dynamic Quality. But I backtracked on
> that because Pirsig also says that Dynamic Quality can be negative.
>
> I need to take a little more time to go over your solution. I
> sidestepped the hi-lo problem the first time I noticed it and now it's
> come back with a vengeance.
>
...
>
> As you can see I'm not clear about this at all. >:|
>
Diana,
I think you are very clear on this one. Pirsig did some damage when he
described the stove Value experience as one of "absolute" low quality.
Your analysis above is the correct one. The stove experience is both
high and low quality, again depending upon context.
>From a survival context perspective, it is a very high Value
experience. From a derriere context perspective, it is a very low Value
experience.
>From a learning context perspective, it is a high Value experience.
Etc.
In SOM reality the above, unending list of context perspectives produces
contradictions, etc.
In MoQ reality the above list shows us again that there are 'many
truths.' Negative vs. positive, and high vs. low, are context
dependent.
SOM demands absolutes, MoQ demands many truths, each with their own
context.
Keep up the good work, Diana - your mind is clear, sharp, and good.
Mtty,
Doug Renselle.
> Diana
>
-- "Don't throw away those Mu answers. . .They're the ones you GROW on!"By Robert M. Pirsig, in 'Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance,' p. 290, Bantam (paperback), 28th edition, 1982.
-- post message - mailto:lilasqd@hkg.com unsubscribe/queries - mailto:diana@asiantravel.com homepage - http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/4670
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu May 13 1999 - 16:42:40 CEST