[MD] MOQ Recursion

[MarshaV]

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

> [Marsha]
> I think your analogies are less successful than Bo's.  
> 
> [Arlo]
> Like I said, if you prefer a map laden with untenable inconsistencies and
> supported by perennial head burying, then I am sure you do. But at least I
> don't have to dodge and evade simple questions about my analogies. Maybe you
> should ask yourself why you do...
> 
> [Marsha]
> Because we are suspended in language, the words 'Metaphysics of Quality' may
> denote Reality as Quality . 
> 
> [Arlo]
> "Denote" is the key word. But at least we agree that Pirsig's metaphysical
> speculations are high-quality analogies about "reality", and not "reality
> itself".

We are suspended in language, but I would think that on this MD list it is 
understood that 'metaphysics' is concerned with the nature of reality, and 
that in discussing the MoQ we are discussing Reality as Quality.   


> 
> [Marsha]
> Sorry, I disagree with your interpretation.  And you do not know what RMP saw. 
> We can only interpret his words. 
> 
> [Marsha had said]
> And I see no 'likeness' between your way of thinking and RMP's.
> 
> [Arlo replied]
> Tell me some examples where you think this is the case.
> 
> [Marsha]
> No, and I will not accept the statement on your authority either.   
> 
> [Arlo]
> Well, since the last time you made a baseless accusation and then refused to
> back it up, I shouldn't be surprised. You can make any accusation against me
> you feel like, Marsha, but if you can't back it up, you are saying more about
> yourself than me.

The baseless statement was your declaration of likeness between what you and 
RMP think.   Why should I get involved in such foolishness?   

 
___