[MD] The MOQ by the moqists Part 2.

[ARLO J BENSINGER JR]

[Bo]
Wish Mary would limit herself. Pirsig levels? The levels are static levels of
quality. Full stop!

[Arlo]
Maybe you should offer to copyedit Mary's posts before they appear, so as to
ensure they say only the approved SOL-line. Nonetheless, yes, the levels are
static levels of quality, or better said "stable preferences of value".

[Bo]
How dense can one be? The subject/object distinction  - the ability to 
tell whats objective from what's subjective is MODERNITY itself and must be
held high in the role of MOQ's highest static level.

[Arlo]
Differentiation of this sort appears on the biological level, among certain
species with complex enough neurostructures. As I said to Marsha, there is
ample evidence that neuropathology hinders any clear line between a bounded
self and "the outside world". 

However, I'll provide the remediation one more time for you, Bo.

SOM is a metaphysical position that holds subjects and objects to be the
primary division of "reality".

MOQ (or QM, or maybe DSM (Dynamic-Static Metaphysics)) is a metaphysical
position that holds that the primary division of "reality" is dynamic-static. 

Both of these are intellectual patterns. 

[Bo]
The intellectual level is a MOQ level and cannot contain the MOQ without
creating a logical impasse.

[Arlo]
As Craig said, and I pointed out before, fear of "recursion" just demonstrates
your own shortcomings. All "metaphysics" are recursive systems in that they
describe a reality that they themselves are part of.

[Bo]
No, Arlo, the language argument is your Ad Hoc invention so you could ridicule
something. 

[Arlo]
I don't have to invent something to ridicule, Bo, your posts provide that on a
daily basis. The point is, if you call something "SOL" simply because it is
describe in a language that makes of "subjects" and "objects", it would be as
relevant to declare all things "ATL" (Active-Temporal Logic) by the same
criteria.

[Bo]
Come to your senses Junior.

[Arlo]
I understand that the person who professes to promote "the one and true MOQ" is
all about ego, so these silly remarks only prove that. 

So grab that ego by the balls and take your "argument" to the only valid ground
it has to stand on-- as an alternative to  Pirsig's MOQ. 

Pirsig's MOQ = intellectual level is NOT SOM.

Bo's MOQ = intellectual level IS SOM.

Let these two competing and distinct ideas battle it out. I already know who I
agree with (Pirsig).