[MD] Reading & Incomprehension

[skutvik at online.no]

Andre

11 June.

Bodvar had said

> Well, it's the QUALITY/MOQ issue. Pirsig creates a great new
> reality(yes I mean it) which states that there is the DQ in which
> staticlevels have formed. OK, does not this suffice? Why postulate a
> still more dynamic dynamism of which the MOQ is a "static" pattern?
 
Andre:
> And here lies the core of your trouble with the MOQ Bodvar...you come
> so close to understanding it. I have told you before but you simply
> ignore it.The 'great sin' has nothing to do with words. The great sin
> has to do with your interpretation. The MOQ does NOT include DQ!!! in
> the way you use it.

Kudos to you Andre for at least sticking to the issue. Even the "immer 
besserwisserisch"  Krimel backed out and our Oracle Matt will not 
touch it, or do not understand it and Ham ..... well I haven't yet 
deciphered his entry. 

> I have told you many times that Mr. Pirsig, in LILA, uses DQ and
> Quality interchangeably but refers to two different perspectives!!!
> The use of DQ in LILA is the STATIC referent to Quality. As John
> points out: all definitions of DQ are static ( and therefore wrong...I
> prefer in this context 'misleading') and that is how Mr. Pirsig uses
> the term in LILA. It takes very careful reading.

I understand, but for Heaven sake WHY? "The interpretation" of the 
Quality Flux having evolved static layers is more simple and thus more 
elegant than the same Quality having evolved the MOQ that describes 
the very same process over again! What is it that compel you (all) to 
chose this "ugly" solution?         

> And this misreading has mislead you to twist the MOQ to such bits and
> pieces.

... and compel you utter these blatant lies. The SOL interpretation has 
much less "bits and pieces" that the Quality/MOQ one. 

> There IS a greater DQ outside the DQ/SQ because DQ/Sq is the static,
> metaphysical representation, the finger pointing to... .DQ is the
> intellectual (static) referent to Quality!!! within the MOQ.

Where will the finger pointing end? Isn't the Quality/MOQ meta-
metaphysics also static and requires a still greater QUALITY (slash) 
Quality (slash slash) MOQ meta-meta-metaphysics? 

> To accommodate your 'intellect' you have to create a Quality/MOQ
> meta-metaphysics and this is NOT a Gordic Knot spun by Mr. Pirsig. It
> has been created and maintained all by yourself.

As shown in "The Summary" the Quality/MOQ is created by Pirsig.

> Problem with you Bodvar is that you do not realize that I just made
> your life 'complete' because you will not accept this and instead live
> in a metaphysical framework and think this is pure experience, pure
> Quality, pure existence...(and accusing me of still living in
> SOM...because the percolator keeps on burning itself out).

Problem with you is not having understanding the initial metaphysical 
inside-out turn that makes value the base of everything, thus static 
value is value too while you treat SQ as some latter-day equivalent of 
SOM's "objective". Sure, we live within the static range, DQ is too 
dangerous to play with. Phaedrus did and paid a heavy price, but it 
brought us the MOQ and it must not be squandered. 

Bodvar