[MD] The SOM/MOQ discrepancy.

[Ham Priday]

Hi Platt --



> Relying on Pirsig's evolutionary moral levels as a way of organizing your
> thoughts gives you a lot more understanding of reality than is possible by
> imagining archangels circling the planet.

I will organize my thoughts as I see fit, thank you.  As for "more 
understanding of reality", I've seen no evidence that the laws and 
principles of scientific investigation are invalid or unworkable.  If 
"reality" refers to physical existence, chemistry, physics, electronics, 
cosmology, botany, biology, physiology, psychology, sociology, and economics 
have been around far longer than Pirsig's MoQ whose levels are named after 
some of them.  Ultimate reality is another matter (as Craig has demonstrated 
below).

[Platt]:
> Pirsig's argument is that absolute reality is everyday experience.

How can that be?  What is "absolute" about everyday experience?  Quality? 
Truth?  Morality?

> Quality (Value) comes prior to any division or any hierarchy and is
> "realized" every waking moment. But, as long as thinking requires
> patterns for meaning, it requires divisions, hierarchies and other
> intellectual structures. Pirsig has given us the division of DQ/SQ
> and the value levels to make reality more intellectually meaningful
> than ever before.

Seems that at least one longtime MoQer is confused about the organization of 
reality by Pirsig's paradigm:

[Craig]:
> In SOM only one metaphysics can be correct - the one that identifies
> all objects & their relationships correctly.
> In the MoQ there are various ways that reality is structured.
> Is the biological level: plants, animals & prokaryotes?
> Mitosis & photosynthesis?  Seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting & touching?
> What is the intellectual level: thoughts & concepts?  Language & logic?
> Truth & falsity?

Clearly, Pirsig's four levels are intended to represent existential reality. 
But is inorganic matter a "value level"?  Is evolution the value of the 
Biological Level?  Is human experience or morality the value of the Social 
Level?  Is thought or language the value of the Intellectual Level?  And 
where in Pirsig's hierarchy is the knowing self represented??

> In my book, Pirsig's metaphysical structure provides greater meaning
> and understanding than your structure. But, your binding of value and
> experience together holds out hope that you will be enlightened. :-)

Structure, relations, and process define objective reality. 
Value-sensibility, experience, and intellect define subjective awareness. 
Take away either premise and nothing, according to Pirsig's scheme, remains. 
What would be your answer?

The best of the holiday season to you, also, Platt.

--Ham