[MD] The Quality/MOQ dichotomy

[Ham Priday]

Bo and all MD --


After reviewing the elaborate diagrams Bo has reconstructed from Pirsig's
box representing Reality according to the MoQ, I see his argument as 
follows:

In LILA, which superseded ZMM, Reality is represented as:

                                        Quality
                                             |
                Dynamic Quality -slash- Static Quality
                (pre-intellectual)            (intellectual or S/O)


Bo insists this is wrong, arguing instead for a variant of the original ZMM 
diagram which appeared (in Pirsig's SODV paper) like this...

               DYNAMIC QUALITY
                        - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                       |                 INTELLECT                | 
Subjective
                       | 
|<--- Static
                       |          SOCIAL PATTERNS         |       Patterns
                       |- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -|
                       |     BIOLOGICAL PATTERNS     |       Objective
                       | 
|<--- Static
                       |      INORGANIC PATTERNS     |        Patterns
                        - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

...but, according to Bo, "should have" looked like this:

               DYNAMIC QUALITY -slash- STATIC QUALITY
                                          (intellectual or S/O)

[Bo explains]:
> In the complete MOQ the static range is enlarged with the four
> levels where intellect comes last [first?].
>
> If Pirsig had meant that the top box(es) were to disappear after
> the splits all would have been fine - SOM would have been the S/O
> and the MOQ would have been the DQ/SQ - but as it is the top
> boxes remain and has created the said Quality/MOQ
> "metaphysics" that seemingly override the MOQ.

I gather that Bo wants the primary split to be labeled "Dynamic/Static" 
instead of "Subjective/Objective", "Intellect" to be shown under "Dynamic", 
and all patterns shown under "Static".

My own view is that Pirsig wanted to differentiate between subjective and 
objective patterns (the "SO--" in his presentation title), while also 
accounting for a  Dynamic/Static split.  Intellect is clearly the oddball 
here, because it is a function rather than a pattern.  But what makes 
Intellect "dynamic" for Bo and Quality "dynamic" for Pirsig I have not been 
able to fathom.  In any case, neither Bo nor Pirsig seem to recognize 
subjective AWARENESS as an agency distinct from all values, levels, 
patterns, objects, experiences, or concepts it perceives.  If existential 
reality is understood to be the result of a dichotomy or split (which I 
believe it is), clearly Sensibility (i.e., pre-intellectual awareness) must 
be one of the contingencies.

In my opinion.

--Ham