[MD] Thus spoke Lila

[Steven Peterson]

Hi Arlo, Platt,

On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 2:06 PM, Arlo Bensinger <ajb102 at psu.edu> wrote:

> [Platt]
>
> "In order to climb outside the structure, one must first create a structure
> outside."
>
> Precisely why the MOQ structure must be outside its own intellectual level
> structure..
>
> Bo's SOL  is right.
>
> [Arlo]
> Of course, then in order to look at that structure from the outside, you
> need something outside of that. And so on an so an so on....
>
> Talk about being stuck in SOL.
>
> Since according to Pirsig, everything is either DQ or SQ, is your MOQ a
> fifth-level of static patterns of value? Or some new non-DQ/non-SQ category?


Steve:
Arlo, this  is an excellent rebuttal and what ought to be a knockdown
argument against SOL as a solution to the imagined container logic problem
with the MOQ.


Platt quotes Pirsig:

"You can't have box 'A' (the MOQ) contain within itself box 'B'
(intellectual level) which in turn contains box 'A.' (the MOQ). That's
whacko.   (Parens added.)

Bo's SOL is right.

Steve:

No it isn't. The MOQ doesn't contain itself in any sense that would violate
ant container logic. The MOQ (Pirsig's philosophy) is capable of being
described in MOQ terms (Pirsig's vocabulary) just as the word "vocabulary"
is contained within your vocabulary without any violation of container
logic. The MOQ doesn't literally contain itself, but it does describe itself
as an intellectual pattern.

This is only a perceived problem for Bo because for him metaphysics is
reality rather than words about reality. Pirsig thinks metaphysics is a
thousand page menu but not food. Do you think metaphysics is reality? Does
Quality = Reality or does the MOQ = Reality?