[MD] Social level for humans only

[Arlo Bensinger]

[JC]
I believe, the issue of extending the social level to animals has 
also been accepted by Krimel, Bo, Arlo and me

[Platt]
The SOL interpretation has been accepted by Bo, Marsha, Mary and me.

[Arlo]
Well I can't speak for Krimel or John, I would never say that my 
extension of sociality to certain non-human species is an 
"interpretation" of Pirsig's metaphysics. If anything, its a clear 
disagreement I have with him. I accept Pirsig's statement and accept 
that his ideas exclude non-human species from the social and 
intellectual levels. So when I talk about Pirsig, I make it clear 
that my ideas about non-human sociality are my own, that they are 
offered in contrast to the ideas set forth by Pirsig. I do not claim 
that enlightened "strong interpreters" (such as myself) will see that 
Pirsig really "meant" to include animal sociality, and his latter 
comments about this can be safely ignored because Pirsig is a "weak 
interpreter" of Pirsig.

And, I have not brow-beaten every thread in recent memory with my 
"SASS" (Some Animal Species are Social). When specific threads 
dedicated to criticising Pirsig's exclusion pop-up, I will contribute 
of course (as I plan to at some point in the recent talk about bees and all).

The point of this is that (1) it is valid to have disagreements with 
Pirsig and appropriate to open dialogue about the nature of these 
disagreements,  and (2) it is NOT valid to claim that Pirsig "meant" 
something he has stated he clearly did not mean, going so far as to 
claim to be a better "interpreter" for Pirsig's pre-hospitalized 
thoughts than Pirsig himself.

Bo is offering an alternative to Pirsig's metaphysics, as I am when I 
talk about a metaphysics of Quality that includes some animal species 
as evidencing social activity. There is nothing wrong with this, and 
such is the way overall discourse evolves. This is valid ground. It 
is where Bo and his SOL-MOQ should be standing, alongside me and my SASSy-MOQ.