[MD] are theism and mysticism mutually exclusive notions?

[Case]

[Platt]
When it came to social level politics, Pirsig left a hole big enough to 
drive a lot trucks through. Arlo and I happen to have widely 
differently configured trucks.

[Case]
Arlo and I drive the same kind of truck but he is better at staying awake on
that road than I. 

[Platt]
If you'll re-read Chapter 11 of Lila I believe you'll see that biology 
did indeed "triumph over inorganic forces," such as gravity. There are 
many quotes about this, but perhaps one will suffice: "Biological 
evolution can be seen as a process by which weak Dynamic forces at a 
subatomic level discover stratagems for overcoming huge static 
inorganic forces at a superatomic level."  The key word here is 
"overcoming" as opposed to "emerging." 

[Case]
The most charitable thing I can say about Chapter 11 is that Pirsig was
trying to dumb it down. If taken seriously, which I don't, Chapter 11 is...
poorly conceived.

[Platt]
Having worked for an insurance company for many years, I know something
about mortality tables and such which substitutes certainty for the  
uncertainty faced by individuals. You can't predict when an individual  
will die, but you can predict that out of umpity-ump millions of 
individuals, so many will die at age 30, so many at 40, so many at 50, 
etc. I think it's called the law of large numbers. But, I'm not telling 
you anything you don't know . Whether the MOQ can be of help to those 
individuals unlucky enough to die young is doubtful, In fact, I doubt 
if the MOQ can help us cope with uncertainty any more than belief in a 
caring God. However, I will be following your ideas closely to see how
you tie uncertainty and morality together in a way that increases our 
understanding and explanatory power. 

[Case]
So did you do much work with mortality tables? What sorts of tables do the
insurance companies look at? Do they get the information from their own
customers or do they share information? I am sincerely interested in your
take on this.
 
Case earlier:
> The biggest obstacle that I see in the path of this is the idea that DQ
> is good.

[Platt]
I think it's a mistake to make DQ and change synonymous because then 
the obstacle you bring up cannot be overcome. Rather I see DQ as pure 
awareness which is good per se regardless of what one is aware of. In 
other words, through good times and bad, it's better to be aware than
not, especially considering the alternative. Since the urge to gain and 
maintain betterness happens to be the case, awareness seeks the better 
of all choices for its own sake. It seeks "the good dog." Or, as Sophie 
Tucker said, "I've been rich and I've been poor." Believe me, honey, 
rich is better." Or, as the Chinese leaders said to the people of China 
after Mao died, "To get rich is glorious." We've seen the consequences 
of that!  In other words, the DQ force is on the inside, not something 
"out there" to be measured or manipulated. 

But, I could be wrong.

[Case]
I thought the point of a metaphysics was to find a set of rules that apply
no matter what the situation. They should work outside and in. Emotion and
perception are ever changing or dynamic. They are made static in memory and
even more so by virtue of repetition and association.

But I could be wrong too.