[MD] Another parallel

[skutvik at online.no]

Dear John

At times you show traces of an understanding (of the MOQ) but then it 
vanishes . 

13 July you  wrote:
> I just wanna chime in on Dave's side on this one.  Great post prof.

DMB: 
>  If the 4th level is SOM, then William James, John Dewey, John Stuhr,
> Sandra Rosenthal, Hegel, Heidegger and a whole host of other
> philosophers must have been using something other than intellectual
> patterns when they criticized SOM as a philosophical problem. On what
> basis can one offer a critique of SOM, if not an intellectual basis? 

The said names are solidly within academia, and academia is SOM 
(the church of reason) out of which doors Phaedrus of ZAMM was 
thrown. Pirsig came back with a revised version of the MOQ that could 
be accepted as classical philosophy, but the true MOQ is still outside 
academia. I have in my possession a letter where Pirsig says that 
even though Hegel's superficially may be compared to his own it's not 
the same.

Look to this quote from LILA, it says it:

    It's very easy to spend your whole life swishing old tea around 
    in your cup thinking it's great stuff because you've never really 
    tried anything new, because you could never get it in, because 
    the old stuff prevented its entry because you were so sure the 
    old stuff was so good, because you never really tried anything 
    new . . . on and on in an endless circular pattern.   

I will answer DMB more extensively
   
Bodvar