[MD] What is SOM?

[skutvik at online.no]

Ron 

20 Aug. you wrote:

Bo before:
> > A paradox is the sure sign that something is wrong with the basic
> > assumptions and MOQ says that the S/O assumption is the culprit and
> > introduces its own DQ/SQ schism and this plus the static levels provides
> > us with a new explanation that makes tons of sense compared to the SOM  

> Ron:
> How do you conceptualize the DQ/SQ schism? If I remember correctly, by
> your interpretation,SQ is all we may know, DQ is indefinable. 

I hope the meaning of your question dawns on me while writing. 
The MOQ postulates (conceptualizes) a DQ/SQ schism. It says 
that DQ is the source from which the inorganic level (as its first 
creation) sprang. The rest of the levels spring from the level below 
"egged on" by the DQ that saturates all existence. (I like the 
wave/water example, the waves are static forms of dynamic water)  
SQ is definitely "all we may know", I believe that is MOQ's central 
tenet.  

> Why have a DQ when everything from things to thoughts about things is
> SQ?

You know even the inorganic level isn't "concrete", forces, energy, 
fields are intangible yet most effective. OK, that may not be your 
issue. At least the MOQ has the intellectual level as its last static 
creation and it is at this level the notion of "things" as different from 
"thoughts about things" emerged. At the social level (religion the 
chief social pattern according to Pirsig) there is no such distinction. 
God does not exist in our thoughts. Thoughts is a word you won't 
find in pre-intellect texts. 

NB!
We exist in God's thoughts Christendom said after it began to be 
influenced by the Greeks ...i.e. by the intellectual level.)    

> In your opinion does this mean MoQ is SQ also? 

The MOQ is the DQ/SQ reality. Full stop!. Pirsig originally said that 
the MOQ is an intellectual pattern, meaning a theory about Quality, 
but THAT violates his own container logic, it violates the MOQ too 
by creating a "QUALITY//DQ/SQ" metaphysics. He abandoned it 
later by saying that Quality=DQ, but in the "Summary" from 2005 
he repeated the old sentence again, that which DMB clings too 
and makes the MOQ a SOM subsidiary ...a mere subjective 
theory.

Bo