[MD] -elitist ideas

[ARLO J BENSINGER JR]

[Kevin]
>From this point of view I'd say the only things that are amoral are the things
we don't engage, interact with, perceive or experience.

[Arlo]
According to this, if Quality is amoral, it is something we don't engage,
interact with, perceive or experience.

[Kevin]
So for me, you question translates to, is Quality – that which defines me and
is my source – something that I engage, interact with, perceive and
experience? 

[Arlo]
You seem to lead towards a "yes" answer, but then suddenly say...

[Kevin]
Do I need a moral framework to experience Quality? I agree with your statement
Marsha.

[Arlo]
Your transitional sentence here is one I find misleading. Since Quality IS
morality ("Quality is morality. Make no mistake about it." (Pirsig, LILA)), you
are asking if one needs a moral framework to experience morals. When in fact,
we have a moral framework BECAUSE we experience morals.

"Gravitation is an inorganic pattern of values", and Pirsig has called the
static levels "sets of morals" (with Dynamic Quality being a moral force).
Hence when we experience gravity we are experiencing inorganic moral value.
"Truth is an intellectual pattern of values", and hence an intellectual moral
value.

"The idea that the world is composed of nothing but moral value sounds
impossible at first", but this is precisely with what the MOQ replaces SOM. And
the static moral value we call the four levels is left in the wake of the
"moral force", Dynamic morality or Dynamic Quality.