[MD] neener neener

[Andre Broersen]

Steve to Bodvar:
Your misconception is that one can "live inside" a metaphysical system
which is a description of reality and not reality itself.

Bodvar:
The above took me some time to de-cipher, but I guess it means the
trite "reality in itself versus theories about reality". If you had the ability
to understand the "Newton Gravity" example in ZAMM you would
understand what Pirsig while he still were Phaedrus thought about it.

LILA p 68:
   As long as you're inside a logical, coherent universe of thought
   you can't escape metaphysics.  Logical positivism's criteria for
   "meaningfulness" were pure metaphysics..  cornered

And this is just right. What characterizes the human race is its
relentless ordering of existence. Wherever explorers went the people
they met all had a metaphysical explanation of (their) existence. This
spelt the transition from the biological to the social level IMO. Had
Pirsig just stuck to this great insight all would have been fine, but true
to (his) tradition he went on to abolish it by speaking about the
Aristotelian kind of metaphysics  "a branch of philosophy ..etc."  which
is SOM's "subjective description of an reality in itself" something that
gives all you arch-somist a handle to destroy the MOQ.

Andre:
Hi Bodvar,
This showed me how you think about the MoQ. You do not 'think' about
it, you experience it and by experiencing it you respond to posts and
try
to convey this experiencing into words. ( This is what gets 'us' so
confused about your expression sometimes).

Anyway, it seems to me that you see the MoQ dynamically, i.e as a
living 'metaphysics'...something never been done before (hence your
abhorrence at it being converted by Pirsig as a static pattern of
value). It isn't. There is nothing 'intellectual' about it. And here I
go back to the PhD quote: we have to stop conceptualising and start
experiencing. All conceptualisations will, inevitably, end us up in
SOM ...the MoQ is 'above' conceptualisations. It is an expression of
direct experience. i.e. DQ/SQ.

Am I, at last, beginning to understand your experience of the MoQ?

Kind regards
Andre