Jonathan B. Marder (marder@agri.huji.ac.il)
Thu, 4 Jun 1998 17:23:09 +0100
It occurs to me that perhaps DQ has no good/bad morality, and this
evaluation is an SQ thing. Pirsig's "hot stove" example may be not the
best one for illustrating the point. It forces one to straight away
consider the obvious BAD quality of the situation.
Consider an alternative example of someone diving into freezing water.
First reaction is SHOCK (DQ), then evaluation of the situation "THAT's
FREEZING" (bad quality) or "EXHILIRATING" (good quality).
[snip]
>An example of the entrance of a dynamic pattern in the intellectual
>arena is when a problem is faced and someone asks "What's the best
>answer to this problem?" instead of asking "How has this problem been
>answered before?" Answering the later question would give you the
static
>intellectual pattern of good. Answering the former question may
present
>a dynamic pattern which may take the place of the existing static
>pattern.
>[snip]
If we take the good/bad morality out of the first question, it becomes
"What are possible answers to this problem?".
DQ is about putting the possibilities on the agenda.
SQ is about evaluating the possibilities that have arisen.
Jonathan B. Marder <MARDER@agri.huji.ac.il>
Department of Agricultural Botany, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Faculty of Agriculture, P.O.Box 12, Rehovot 76100, ISRAEL
Phone: +972 8 9481918 Fax: +972 8 9467763
Web page: http://www.agri.huji.ac.il/~marder
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu May 13 1999 - 16:43:20 CEST