[MD] MD Two Theses in the MOQ

[skutvik at online.no]

Dan and moqtalk 

On 9 Dec. you wrote:

Bo earlier:
> >Pirsig's (via Paul) clearing up of Quality's divisions is much
> >welcome by me because it eliminates the argument that there's a
> >DQ outside of the MOQ.

Dan:
> I'm sorry but I don't understand your argument. How can Dynamic
> Quality be outside of the Metaphysics of Quality? How can "it" be
> inside the MOQ? "It" is what the MOQ is written on.

Ask Paul the question how DQ can be outside the MOQ. I agree 
most vehemently with you, DQ is neither inside or outside. The 
DQ/SQ aggregate constitutes the MOQ. However, the "written 
on" analogue is like language's black hole, everything is 
expressed by language, all diagrams are drawn on some 
medium.     

Bo earlier:
> > I wonder why you see a Quality prior to the DQ/SQ so important.
 
Dan:
> I don't know if I'd put it quite like that. "Prior" is a static
> quality concept that (I would say) doesn't pertain to Dynamic Quality.

We only have language. If words are "static" and thereby useless 
the rest is silence. Language must be kept out of it lest it ends in 
absurdity.

> Rather I think it important to note that there are subtle differences
> between the Quality of ZMM and Dynamic Quality of LILA. For instance,
> the Zuni brujo story seems to indicate that we cannot tell the Dynamic
> Quality individuals from the degenerates until well after the fact.

IMO Pirsig's various insights about Quality were so many and 
differentiated that not all fit any single interpretation and also that 
they represent various phases in the MOQ's development. The 
brujo insight is clearly from before the level phase, maybe the 
very one that lead to the level system..     

> Yet ZMM seems to indicate that it's easy to tell what has Quality and
> what doesn't -- the work the fellow does who welds the worn out chain
> guard, for example. Remember how Robert Pirsig takes the man unawares
> by complimenting him on his work?

It sounds to me like nostalgia about the good old days before the 
consumer era. Its one of the most touching passages in the book.  
 
> >When water feezes it is water all the same so the liquid/solid
> >state is a good example of the DQ/SQ dichotomy ... IMO.

> Yes an excellent example! Still, you're using static quality examples
> again to illustrate Dynamic Quality, a mistake in my opinion, and too
> easy to do.

Well, I'm only mortal ;-)

Bo