[MD] Waiter, I don't think this Quality is any Good

[Andre Broersen]

Steve to Andre:
... can you explain what you did mean by "I don't believe in Quality"?

Andre:
Hi Steve, I really cannot remember whether I had anwered this or
not..rather hectic here. Anyway, here goes...
I wasn't playing cat and mouse nor word games. My experience of
Quality is as real as my experience of the existence of my computer at
which I work at the moment, or the chair upon which I sit.

Do I 'believe'. in the existence of my computer? Do I believe in the
existence of the chair. This is a peculiar use of the word 'believe'.

Do you 'believe' in the sun rise when you see it?

Did Lao Tzu 'believe' in the Tao?
Did Siddharta Gautama 'believe' in enlightenment?
Did Jesus 'believe' in God the Father? ( supposing Jesus existed and
actually said what he allegedly said).

Does Pirsig 'believe' in Quality?

The simple answer of course is no.

Look at this:
He crosses a lonesome valley, out of the mythos, and emerges as if
from a dream, seeing that his whole consciousness, the mythos, has
been a dream and no one's dream but his own, a dream he must now
sustain of his own efforts. Then even ``he'' disappears and only the
dream of himself remains with himself in it. And the Quality, the
areté he has fought so hard for, has sacrificed for, has never
betrayed, but in all that time has never once understood, now makes
itself clear to him and his soul is at rest.

At no point does Pirsig state that he 'believes' in Quality. No, he is
absolutely convinced it is here. And, of course even more, it is
fundamental to everything.

It can be apprehended by direct experience. No belief required. If
belief was required you'd have to take Pirsig's word for its
existence, but you don't.

This is what I liked about Matt's post the other day. Quality is. It
doesn't belong to Pirsig!

The static representations thereof, as laid down by Pirsig are general
enough to appeal to anybody and accept or reject as a way of ordering
experience within an evolutionary frame. That is all.

Pirsig has left the door wide open to find out for ourselves how to
live within the DQ/SQ configuration. Nowhere does he say; "Thou
shall..." and nowhere does he say: 'This is the way it is and this is
its ultimate goal!!

The static representations are no papal bull.

It is a biographical metaphysics. Perhaps a cultural biographical
metaphysics as well. It sure is the first metaphysics, or any other
philosophy that I know of, in which its 'subject matter' is allowed a
voice....a part to play.

The MoQ is a living program in which we are all allowed to play our part.

No ultimate or absolute goal because this hasn't been played out.
These issues are being played out at the code levels, the 'battle'
zones. The DQ/SQ configuration.

I'm beginning to rattle on now, sorry.

For what it is worth.
Andre


Cheers
Andre