[MD] Pirsig, Peirce and Philosophologology re-establishing pragmatism

[Ron Kulp]

[Bo]

Can't remember if we have spoken before, this discussion is beyond human
memory. 


[x]
I believe it is our first time (blushingly)..
 



[BO]

21 Feb. you wrote to Matt: (once a fallen priest, but now back on the
pulpit ;)

> ".. in this approach he took on SOM And arrived at MOQ. Using 
> mechanics terms, MOQ is SOM with its head out of its own ass.

Hark, hark! "MOQ is SOM with its head ...etc. Much like my assertion,
and if you accept that SOM becomes the top level of the MOQ it's a
perfect match. Must not the previous theory be the top "level" of the
new one? Newton's physics is Relativity's "best of the old sort" and
sufficient for all practical purposes except the 
most "extreme"? 

[x]
Exactly, there is no cause to abandon it as of yet and no reason it
can't work with quantum theory "What is the Origin of Spin?"
 By Nassim Haramein a paper I posted a while back presents a GUT or
"grand unification theory" addressing that subject. 
Same with SOM , Pirsig is'nt presenting anything overly original just
clarification of meaning and a resolve to diagnose
And make it right , MOQ  is more a GUT and less a philosophy on it's own
. I feel it's about understanding SOM and making it
Work for you.