[MD] God is dead.

[Scott Roberts]

Robert et al,

Robert said:
You said 'Scientifically speaking, Quality suffers from the same problem God
does; neither can be measured'; I disagree, we are each of us individually
assessing quality all the time - that is what all life is. Trouble is that
my good is not necessarily the same as your good (one man's meat is another
man's poison). The moq I see as an attempt to try to say some things about
quality that we can all agree on and thereby create a moral framework that
can be used to help resolve complex issues.

I would never say that 'I believe in Quality' as you suggested, it is not
like some guiding light that I put faith in. I try to cut out faith in my
thinking when ever I can.

Scott:
Faith comes into the MOQ when it claims that Quality is omnipresent, 
including being inherent in the inorganic, and that DQ is the driving force 
of evolution (note that Pirsig claims that evolution is purposeful). Our 
experience alone cannot tell us that in the absence of sufficiently complex 
neural systems there is any experience of Quality, yet the MOQ claims that 
there is.

The reason I accept this MOQ claim is twofold: first that I find the secular 
evolutionary tale to be fallacious (it takes the products of perception, in 
particular the spatiotemporality of things, as existing in the absence of 
perception), and second, that mystics say so. The first consideration is not 
in itself sufficient to say that Quality is omnipresent (there is nothing 
inherent in the concept of the non-spatiotemporal that implies value), so it 
boils down to faith in the mystics that allows me to say that there is 
Quality involved in inorganic processes.

- Scott