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

[skutvik at online.no]

Dear Nephew John

I know you have addressed me several times in the later days, but 
I have made it a policy to check the mailbox once a day  - in the 
morning here - as not to be overwhelmed, but thanks anyway. 

16 Jan.

Bo before: 
> > However, the addition of new levels does not appeal to me, if we
> > open that gate where to stop? I agree very much that logic is the
> > universe's prerequisite and have suggested it as the inorganic
> > "carbon". Where this originates ..?? ... but at this - um - level
> > the buck stops for us all.

John:
> It's all an analogy as you know, and Quality has always been, imo,  an
> analogy for the universal logic you are reaching for.
> I thought you knew that?

I'll open with my standard phrase: "You don't understand!" I know 
that Pirsig has said so, but the idea is that ALL IS VALUE and if so 
all is NOT analogies!. If anyone finds that there is something more 
basic than value - say - analogy -  then we have a "Metaphysics of 
Analogies" (MOA): DA/SA, static inorganic analogies .... etc.  
There has been a welter of suggestions of different "groundstuff" 
up through the ages: In my copy of ZAMM my first note in the 
margin was "isn't 'intuition the same as 'quality'"?' And as you 
understand from my rantings I'm not amused by Pirsig's Quality as 
the all-important thing with the MOQ as some afterthought ... why 
he left it in shambles. The MOQ's is the Dynamic/Static split and 
its enormous explanatory power emanates from the  former SOM 
being incorporated in it as its 4th. static level. Now stripped of its 
"M", just the value of the S/O left. (to prevent Marsha coming after 
me with a pallette knife ;-)

Bodvar