[MD] Reading & Comprehension

[david buchanan]

Bo comments:
...Then the million Euro question is: What does SOM and Aretê translate into in a MOQ context?


dmb says:
Well, I want to be more specific and just focus on how Arete translates into the terms of the MOQ. If you just look at Pirsig's description it is obvious that he's talking about Dynamic Quality. It is also obvious that no reasonable person could believe he is describing static social quality. Again, I'm saying that Bo mistakenly equates Arete with the social level. Pirsig says Arete is "ever changing, ultimately unknowable in any kind of fixed rigid way." He's talking about DQ. That is exactly how he describes DQ in Lila. 

The fact that the intellectual level was emerging from the social level is also true, but it's not the same thing. You're confusing two separate issues. 

Again, Bo construes the Sophists as teaching static social quality instead of Dynamic Quality. That misses the central point of the book. It undermines the central point of the book and misconstrues the central term of the book and misconstrues the Sophists as social level subjectivists. That's what Plato said about them! That's the slander that Pirsig is trying to undo by showing what they were really up to and what we lost when their bones turned to dust.

You think Pirsig long philosophical quest ended by identifying his Quality with social static quality? Is that why he loves the Sophists and takes up their cause? C'mon, that would be ridiculous. It is ridiculous. Like I said, I don't see how it could make sense to describe static social quality as "reality itself, ever changing, ultimately unknowable in any kind of fixed rigid way". social static quality is NOT reality itself, it is knowable in a fixed and rigid way. That's why we call it static. 

Bo said:

... but it's plain silly to believe that DQ was more prominent at some particular time in history. 



dmb says:

Calling it silly does not count as an argument. 

Now I remember why I gave up the last time. There is no DQ in your MOQ. It's all static, with a little nod to evolution instead any real comprehension of this central idea. Naturally, your interpretation of everything presented to you as evidence is misconstrued so that you can't even see that it is evidence. And so any effort to correct you is quite futile.

But hopefully others will see what's going on. If not, then shame on me for wasting time.


 		 	   		  
_________________________________________________________________
The New Busy think 9 to 5 is a cute idea. Combine multiple calendars with Hotmail. 
http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?tile=multicalendar&ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_5