[MD] New Age++

[MarshaV]

Hi Bo,

A subject/object metaphysics is a theory of everything.  The MOQ is a 
theory of patterns of value (static quality), and an acknowledgement 
of unconfined value (Dynamic Quality).  A word, 'theory' for 
instance, is a pattern of value.

'God' is a pattern of value I find useless in the present.

Marsha


At 04:57 AM 1/20/2006, Bo wrote:

>A metaphysics is the theory of everything  and according to Pirsig
>no-one can escape having a notion what's all is about. Thus we
>may call the ancient mythological reality "social metaphysics".
>Then the intellectual level's subject/object metaphysics replaced
>this and finally the MOQ that replaced SOM, in which all previous
>world view have become static value levels.
>
>These preliminaries to show that calling the MOQ a theory
>meaning a thought in our mind is to make it a SOM pattern.
>Admittedly it began as a one - Phaedrus was a somist and
>accepted his colleagues premises (the dilemma 'horns') but after
>he had rejected them and postulated that Quality was the source
>of the S/O the MOQ  "went off on a purpose of its own".
>
>
>About DQ and it's "nature". In the social level's myths (religions')
>God cannot be defined (seen) by humans, this is their postulate,
>but God is of course part and parcel of religion. And DQ being
>"outside" the MOQ is the same ideal but untenable postulate.
>
> > "In the few diagrams I have made of the evolutionary structure of the
> > MOQ, Dynamic Quality is not part of the diagram.  Dynamic Quality is
> > represented by the paper the diagram is written on.  I like that
> > device because there is no diagram in the world that can contain the
> > paper it is written on." [Pirsig to Turner, Sept '05]
>
>"The few diagrams"? There are no diagrams in LILA, but saying
>that DQ isn't part of the diagram is the same thing as God outside
>the religion. If you can stand more go to the diagram of the first
>"moq" in ZMM and make it into the final MOQ. It begins with a
>box called "Quality (Reality)" that splits into DQ and SQ . On the
>paper the top box remains behind, but it is really this box which is
>split so there is no DQ afterwards. This is the source of the
>illusion of DQ outside the MOQ
>
>However I have another no-box type of diagram (made by Pirsig
>in 1993) where the static evolution is depicted as concentric rings
>- inorganic the inner, intellectual the outer. This is an excellent
>presentation, here's nothing but the DQ/SQ pair and it's clear that
>DQ is part of the MOQ. The paper is the DQ and it may stretch
>from here to eternity, but on another paper a different
>metaphysics may be drawn..
>
>Sincerely
>
>Bo