[MD] Social Imposition ?

[pholden at davtv.com]

Quoting Heather Perella <spiritualadirondack at yahoo.com>:

> Platt and everybody, 
> 
>      [Platt]
> > Your description of evolution and Pirsig's are at
> > odds. I'll go with Pirsig's.
> 
>      Ok, fine, you choose Pirsig's use of evolution
> here.  I'm not denying this topic.  Yet, I am
> wondering.  Since this thread is trying to clear-up
> intellectual and social levels, but Pirsig couldn't do
> it.  Pirsig tried to outline differences, but for some
> reason theses differences have not been clarified
> enough for anybody, thus far, to notice distinctions. 
> Some have stated a problem exists.  Others have gone
> their own way, and the debate still goes on.  I know
> you use individual v. collective, and I don't want to
> debate this.  What I do want your opinion on is, since
> Pirsig left the MoQ with the ability to be creative or
> in other words, creativity is involved in the MoQ,
> then doesn't this mean we are to clarify some aspects
> of the MoQ ourselves?  In other words, the MoQ is not
> dead, but alive.  So, on some topics we are to go out
> on a limb, be creative, and at times provide input
> that may or may not catch on.  Therefore we are
> involved in the process, as well as, we are involved
> in understand and making this process all at the same
> time.  Would you agree?  Thus, would we at times
> clarify Pirsig himself, right?  Is this also why
> individual v. collective is debated, thoughts and
> beliefs, thought v. sharing, etc, etc.

Agree. Pirsig's explanation of evolution is not the conventional,
Darwinian explanation. I prefer Pirsig's to Darwin's because it
accounts for not only the how, but also the why.

Regards,
Platt




-------------------------------------------------
This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/