[MD] Where does logic itself belong inside the MOQ?

[Steven Peterson]

Hi Bo,

Bo to Case [Krimel]:
>  I didn't catch your point, but I ask you to employ
> your intelligence on the issue at hand which is purely logical not
> particularly MOQish. Namely if Pirsig's Quality/MOQ meta-
> metaphysics that Steve wields is logically valid? That there is a
> QUALITY other than the DQ of the MOQ and independent of it? For
> instance if there comes a "metaphysics" that rejects the MOQ it is still
> a "MOQ"?

Steve:
Let's not confuse "THE MOQ" (Pirsig's Metaphysics of Quality) with "AN
moQ" (some other metaphysics of Quality). Not only is some
hypothetical future metaphysics that rejects Pirsig's MOQ still
potentially a metaphysics of Quality, but SOM is already a metaphysics
of quality according to Pirsig in Lila:

"There already is a metaphysics of quality.  A subject-object
metaphysics is in fact a metaphysics in which the first division of
Quality-the first slice of undivided
experience-is into subjects and objects."

Bo:
> For instance Quantum Theory predicts a pretty weird world (the
> "Schrodinger Cat" f.ex) but the physicists deny any "objective"
> Newtonian - even Einsteinian - reality" outside Quantum Theory (QT).
> Now, QT is only necessary for sub.atomic events, ordinary physics
> works fine otherwise. I compare this with the MOQ which is only
> needed for the ultimate view. For ordinary purposes its intellectual
> level - SOM - works fine, but Steve insists on a som-like "objective"
> Quality that the MOQ is just one possible explanation of.This is deeply
> wrong, MOQ's Quality Reality only exists within the MOQ.

Steve:
There is no such thing as "objective" Quality in the MOQ other than as
inorganic and biological patterns of value. Quality precedes this
objective-subjective metaohsyical distinction you mention.

Please explain how I am supporting an SOM-like version of the MOQ when
pretty much all I ever need to do in response to your claims is to
quote Pirsig. All your disagreements are with him rather than me.

Best,
Steve