[MD] What is the MOQ?

[Ham Priday]

Hi Chris -- 

> I think I get what Bo means by this:  To a SOMist
> everything is subject and object. To a MOQist everything
> is Quality. If you ask both of them: "but hey, where did
> Objects/Quality come from?" both of them will answer
> that 'it was always there', perhaps adding: 'waiting to be
> recognized by us humans.'
>
> That, and a religious understanding of things isn't part of
> a system, it is what makes a system possible.
>
> But I will ask Bo this then, how does the MOQ and the
> SOM differ?
>
> In fact, I will ask all of you that.

Again, this is a question that confuses the two philosophical ontologies 
that Pirsig addresses.  The MoQ claims to transcend subject/object 
experience by regarding Quality as the undifferentiated source or potential. 
SOM deals with reality as we experience it -- as objective phenomena 
(quality patterns) made aware to cognizant subjects.  The difference is that 
MoQ leaves the source (DQ) undefined, whereas SOM categorizes and defines 
objects and events as levels or patterns of Quality.  Both concepts
are based on a Quality ontology, but no metaphysical theory has been 
provided to relate them.

A "religious understanding of things" is no different than a philosophical 
or mystical understanding of things.  But in order to have metaphysical 
understanding, you need to account for experiential cause-and-effect reality 
as a derivation of the primary undivided source.  And the MoQ does not give 
us the means to do this.  Instead, it argues (unsuccessfully, IMO) for the
idea that Quality exists independently of conscious awareness.  This is 
illogical because quality (i.e., value) is an esthetic judgment that can be 
realized only by a sensible subject.

Therefore the primary source must be something other than quality, such as 
God, Sensibility, or Essence.  Pirsig did not resolve this enigma because it 
would mean allying himself with theism or supernaturalism which are inimical 
to postmodern thought.  That's why DQ remains a vague concept to Pirsigians 
and an unresolved issue in contemporary philosophy.

Regards,
Ham