[MD] MOQ Recursion

[ARLO J BENSINGER JR]

[Arlo had asked]
If it is not an inorganic or biological or social or intellectual pattern of
value, what is it?

[Mary]
As I read Pirsig, a "pattern of values" of any level you pick is a latching of
Dynamic Quality into Static Quality.

[Arlo]
Right, but on which level is the "inorganic level"? Is the "inorganic level"
itself an inorganic, biological, social or intellectual pattern of value? Or
none of the above? 

You had said 'levels aren't concepts', and so I am asking what ARE they?

[Mary]
I guess I don't understand your sentence, "So the "inorganic level" is "pattern
of value" of a new level above intellect".

[Arlo]
Well, this was a follow up to asking if the "inorganic level" itself (or
"levels" themselves) aren't inorganic, biological, social or intellectual
patterns of value, would that mean that the "levels" are patterns of value of a
new level placed above intellect?

[Mary]
Ask a rock to describe a fish. 

[Arlo]
This is a poor analogy, as within the rock's experiential domain "fish" do not
exist (they are not experienced). But Pirsig did write two books about Quality,
and although he maintains the central term as undefined, Quality is something
we all do experience.

Are you suggesting, though, that asking someone what kind of pattern of value
is the "inorganic level" is akin to asking a rock to describe a fish???