[MD] What does Pirsig mean by metaphysics?

[MarshaV]

On Feb 2, 2010, at 10:09 AM, ARLO J BENSINGER JR wrote:

> [Platt]
> Any statement that demands to be taken as valid such as "nothing is absolute"
> or "static patterns are different for everyone" acknowledges the existence of
> an absolute truth from the start.
> 
> [Arlo]
> No. It is simple the unavoidable aspect of self-referential systems. Paradox
> does not imply "absolute truth", if anything it implies "mu". That this is
> difficult for you to understand is amazing. If you'd stop for one second from
> chasing your inane bugbear, and actually try to learn something...

Hello Arlo,

I think the MoQ tolerates paradox  because: 

``Any philosophic explanation of Quality is going to be both false and true precisely 
because it is a philosophic explanation. The process of philosophic explanation is 
an analytic process, a process of breaking something down into subjects and 
predicates. What I mean (and everybody else means) by the word quality cannot 
be broken down into subjects and predicates. This is not because Quality is so 
mysterious but because Quality is so simple, immediate and direct.
    (ZMM, Chapter 20)


Marsha