[MD] Ironistic Metaphysics

[X Acto]

Bo:
The MOQ is a meta-metaphysics compared to the Aristotelian-
Academical term, but as I try to convey, it robs SOM of its "M" rank 
and thereby degrades it to a sub-set of its own. Some people show 
their inability to pull themselves by hair or bootstraps out of SOM by 
not seeing this "transformation". To move from Newton physics to 
Einstein's needs a set of equations called Lorenz Transformation, the 
SOL is such a procedure from SOM to MOQ. 

Ron:

The Lorenz transformation has nothing to do with transforming
calculations from newtonian to relativity. 

"In physics, the Lorentz transformation precisely describes how, 
according to the theory of special relativity, two observers' 
varying measurements of space and time can be converted into 
each other's frame of reference. It reflects the surprising 
fact that observers moving at different velocities report 
different distances, passage of time, and in some cases even 
different orderings of events. The Lorentz transformation was 
the result of attempts by the eponymous Hendrik Lorentz and 
others to explain observed properties of light propagating in 
what was presumed to be the luminiferous aether; Albert Einstein 
later reinterpreted the transformation as a statement about 
the nature of space and time themselves and derived it from 
the axioms of relativity.
-wiki

You sir, are the master of misinformation and a hack.

The SOL procedure, as far as I have been able get from you,
it a semantic one of stripping the "M" from SOM and adding it
to "M"OQ. quite a complicated procedure Bo, what mathematical
formula did you use?

For you, using the gallery metaphor, MoQ is the only painting in the gallery
a bigger one than the previouse painting that was the only painting in the gallery
which now hangs as a detail might hang on the larger painting of the MoQ.
Bo's MoQ. Yay Bo.

But the MoQ I subscribe to. the one that Pirsig presents really isn't a painting at all
but the ability to recognize and value other paintings, it's the knowledge that there is no
one "real" "true" painting that they are all true in their own context and their value
is relative to my own context.

This creates a "radical metaphysic"

Bo's "Meta-Metaphysic" is culturalcentric, limited and falls to the same absolutism that SOM does.
It produces ideas of western cultural superiority.

He produces no support for his assertions other than his rather limited reading of Pirsigs work
and a handfull of vastly misunderstood theories and terms. But he seems to have learned
a very important aspect of "truthiness" that hammering on a single statement long enough
will give it creedance and an illusion of verifyablity and acceptance. Where, in P.T. Barnum
style, the illusion of self importance and granduer go's miles in selling snake oil, the aire
of acerdimic authority is more persuasive than actually knowing what the hell one is talking about.


but we love our Bo just the same


and his struggle with SOM's testicals