[MD] MOQ Recursion

[MarshaV]

In my last statement, that would be accept not except...    


On Aug 9, 2010, at 8:25 AM, ARLO J BENSINGER JR wrote:

> [Marsha]
> I think the question is an inappropriate analogy, and not pertinent. 
> 
> [Arlo]
> It is pertinent, if you are using the "all is analogy" understanding to imply
> that anything and everything someone says about Pirsig's metaphysics is equally
> acceptable. This is what you are saying, isn't it? Or no?

I think your analogies are less successful than Bo's.  


> 
> [Marsha]
> As you have stated it there is no leaving the analogy.  Your statement is null.
> 
> [Arlo]
> Good, then we agree the Metaphysics of Quality is not the Quality Reality, as
> this is an attempt to leave the analogy.

Because we are suspended in language, the words 'Metaphysics of Quality' 
may denote Reality as Quality .   


> 
> [Marsha]
> What you are calling 'untenable inconsistencies' is based on misunderstanding
> Bo's analogy.
> 
> [Arlo]
> No, they are based on a full understanding of what Bo's analogy entails. Pirsig
> saw this as well. The whole "levels aren't patterns of value" morass, for
> example. 

Sorry, I disagree with your interpretation.  And you do not know what RMP saw.  
We can only interpret his words. 


> [Marsha]
> And I see no 'likeness' between your way of thinking and RMP's.
> 
> [Arlo]
> Tell me some examples where you think this is the case.

No, and I will not accept the statement on your authority either.   



 
___