[MD] MOQ Recursion

[plattholden at gmail.com]

All:

Whether the MOQ is an intellectual pattern or a metaphysics or something else  
seems to me to be besides the point. I simply call it a world view and believe 
the better discussion is whether or not the MOQ is superior to other world 
views. IMO the following passage from Lila near the end of the book illustrates 
the meaning of the MOQ far better than any intellectual definition, description 
or analysis:

"He remembered it had been spring then, which is a wonderful time in Montana, 
and the breeze blowing down from the pine trees carried a fresh smell of 
melting snow and thawing earth, and they were all walking down the road, four 
abreast, when one of those raggedy nondescript dogs that call Indian 
reservations home came onto the road and walked pleasantly in front of them. 
They followed the dog silently for a while. Then LaVerne asked John, "What kind 
of dog is that?" 

"John thought about it and said, "That's a good dog." 

A bit later, Pirsig explains the significance of John's answer:

"LaVerne had been asking the question within an Aristotelian framework. She 
wanted to know what genetic, substantive pigeonhole of canine classification 
this object walking before them could be placed in. But John Wooden Leg never 
understood the question. That's what made it so funny. He wasn't joking when he 
said, "That's a good dog." He probably thought she was worried the dog might 
bite her.The whole idea of a dog as a member of a hierarchical structure of 
intellectual categories known generically as "objects" was outside his 
traditional cultural viewpoint.

"What was significant, Phaedrus realized, was that John had distinguished the 
dog according to its Quality, rather than according to its substance. That 
indicated he considered Quality more important." (Lila, 32)

The "Aristotelian framework" is what I consider the intellectual level to be,  
dominated by S/O patterns. By contrast, John Wooden Leg experiences 
within a moral framework dominated by value patterns. Of the two paintings in 
the gallery of "truth," I find John's of higher quality. 

Those whose livelihood depends on definition, description and analysis will no 
doubt prefer other paintings. Yet even they must admit that their choices are 
guided by values.

Speaking of dogs, there's another phrase expressing the negative side of a 
value framework, namely "That dog won't hunt." For me the words "That's a good 
dog" and "That dog won't hunt" pretty well sums up reality as experienced  
through the framework of the MOQ. 

But, I could be wrong.

Regards,
Platt