[MD] The strong interpretation of the MOQ (SIM)

[Arlo Bensinger]

[Marsha]
Play with xacto.  I'm interested in exploration, not 
winning.  There's nothing to win, and no one to win it.

[Arlo]
You accused me of "stifling freedom of speech". I asked for evidence. 
This is what I get. Typical. Maybe you should "explore" your need to 
resort to dishonesty.

[Marsha]
Watch again the section of the Oxford dvd, then argue with Mr. Pirsig.

[Arlo]
I have nothing to argue with Pirsig about since NOTHING	in my post IN 
ANY WAY points towards "stifling free speech".

You could apologize to me for making such a baseless and dishonest 
charge. But I bet you won't.

Or...

Or you could actually answer my straightforward questions.

Why is the following such a seemingly alien concept for you, Platt and Bo?

(1) Bo's formulation for a metaphysics is a critical revision of 
Pirsig's metaphysics.

(2) Bo might say "A metaphysics of Quality that holds the 
intellectual level to SOM is better than A metaphysics of Quality 
that considers SOM to be one on many intellectual patterns", instead 
of "THE metaphysics of Quality holds the intellectual level to SOM".

Why are you all so obsessively hung up on the word "THE", and what 
value do you think it has?

Do you disagree with me that we use the phrase "THE metaphysics of 
Quality" as a conventional way of referring specifically to Pirsig's 
ideas, but that it would in fact be more accurate to say "Pirsig's 
metaphysics"?

Do you not see that obsessing on the "THE" objectifies the "MOQ" into 
some "reality"... that even Pirsig can be "wrong" about? This makes 
no sense. Pirsig can't be wrong about his ideas, but his ideas can be 
wrong. In the same way, Bo's ideas are not "THE MOQ", they are his ideas.

If we drop the word "THE", and instead simply talk about people's 
ideas, do you not see how all this interpretive nonsense and need for 
authoritative legitimacy would disappear?

In other words, what do you think is wrong with saying "A metaphysics 
of Quality that holds the intellectual level to SOM is better than A 
metaphysics of Quality that considers SOM to be one on many 
intellectual patterns"?

Does that not sum up your position? Why is it more important for you 
to say instead "THE metaphysics of Quality holds the intellectual 
level to SOM"?