[MD] What does Pirsig mean by metaphysics?

[John Carl]

I didn't know that the MoQ postulated one dq realm, one sq.  I thought the
MoQ postulates one realm - experience.  This realm of experience can be
sliced and diced innumerable ways,  but the best way we see to divide it,
that is, the highest quality explanation we can come up with right now, is
that experience has a dynamic aspect and a static aspect.  The dynamic we
term DQ, the static sq.

In this metaphysics, experience is generated by Quality.  There is no
pre-valuation of anything.  Until something is valued, it doesn't exist.
 That's the MoQ, and why, in MoQ terms, unpatterned is a fallacy.



>
> > I use to say that Quality comprises all, but I don't really
> > see the revolution of the Quality=Reality axiom. SOM hasn't anything
> > which is S/O split, it simply postulates one subjective and one
> > objective realm. Thus MOQ simply postulates one dynamic and one
> > static realm. Can you, Steve, point to any practical difference
> > between Dynamic Quality and Dynamic Reality?
> >
> Steve:
> I don't understand what you are getting at for most of the above, but,
> nope.
> I don't see a practical difference between Dynamic Quality and Dynamic
> Reality. This is self-evident if Reality = Quality.
>
> BO said:
>
> > It is the pesky Quality on top (in the MOQ diagram) - then
> > dynamic/static split, which is the source of all trouble. Dynamic
> > Quality (or Dynamic Reality) has all the qualities (adjectives) he
> > heaps on it, however it has spawned the known static layers that are
> > definable, knowable ..etc.  I just can't fathom the wisdom behind
> > making Quality something else than the DQ of the MOQ as if words is
> > the great Satan *).


Yeah, as an existentialist, I'd say that the way "reality" or "quality"
presents itself to me, is reality, is Quality.  I have no way of
apprehending  beyond my conception.  So why postulate so?

I guess some people just have ontological needs that are met only in the
conceptualization of a  source, whether its a big bang, yahweh's word or the
Essential Source, they want to have in their conceptual lexicon, something
which contextualizes them, in time.  Even though time itself is a
conceptualization and trying to justify any of this as "logically necessary"
is silly and fraught with  self-contradiction.



> Another fallacy is using "metaphysics" in the
> > Aristotelian (dialectical) sense after he himself realized that there is
> > no universe outside an ordered universe. i.e metaphysics in the
> > Pirsigean sense.
> >
> The letter I wrote is posted on my blog here:


Yes and good luck with that.  Your blog is well named, in fact, it appears
to me the fundamental driving force of the MoQ Discuss all these years is
exactly this "atheistic hope" or subtitled, "How I threw out the bathwater
but hopefully kept the baby".

It's not that hard really, in real life, bathwater has a much more fluid
reality than babies, which are big clumps of squalling matter  easy to
differentiate from warmy soapy water, being not only solid, but mostly,
 noisy.  Especially if you dump them on their noggin while emptying their
bath.

The secret to babies in baths is to tip the tub gently, with one hand on the
baby.

The secret to philosophy is to understand value as fundamental to religion.


All religion is an attempt to codify values, but freeing society from
religious control by eliminating values is insane.   You can't have a
society that's value free.

You try,and a lot of babies end up squalling in a pools of discarded
bathwater.

I can answer one question for you, Pirsig reads.  He'd have to be inhuman or
dead not to.

It's amusing to a theist like me to see how angsty and insecure the
atheistic mind is, reminds me of Krimel in the old days of his fiery debates
with dmb, begging for some sort of sign from on high, "Bob?"  Are you really
out there?  Please answer me.  Please fill my uncertainty with authoritative
confirmation...

Pathetic really.  Probably why they're so rejecting of God.  He doesn't
deign to answer either, therefore he must not exist.

Hopefully you'll get your prayer answered Steve, so you don't end up an
a-bobist.

Take care,

John