[MD] LC Comments

[skutvik at online.no]

Magnus 

3 July u wrote:

> Me? Opinion? Need you ask anyone to tell you these things? :)

Could be you had a lucid moment :-)
 
> "Great theories create new realities"? Hmm, well, yes in the sense
> that the intellectual pattern is real, then yes. 

I should not have used the term "theories" - that lead you immediately 
to the SOMish notion that everything conveyed by language is 
"intellectual".  I meant that P's campfire talk says that grand scientific 
insights expands scientific (intellectual) understanding , consequently 
a metaphysical upheaval like the Quality expands REALITY itself. The 
old metaphysics SOM suddenly finds itself a subset of the new 
metaphysics and "is not amused" ... as shown by the weak -somist - 
interpreters.   

> If we say that our intellectual reality is the sum of all theories and
> ideas, then the intellectual reality is different with the theory than
> without it.

Phew. When a Stone Ager forwarded the "theory" of flint tools its  was 
not an intellectual pattern, nor was the Ten Commandments on 
Moses' stone tablet or Muhammad's messages from Allah. Can't you 
snap out of this silly notion that everything said or written is intellectual, 
it may be in SOM, but not in the MOQ.. 

> However, our inorganic reality hasn't changed one bit. I.e. apples
> still fall exactly as fast as they did before the new theory, and
> planets still orbit the sun exactly as before.

Yes, SOM-ishly seen, but P's campfire message is that "inorganic 
reality" has changed constantly, gravity did not exist when Greek 
physics attributed some craving with arrows for coming to rest on the 
ground. And as you know General Relativity enlarged the data of 
things falling into a non-gravity one. And Quantum Physics have 
changed inorganic reality even more. But, never mind I accept gravity 
as a good scientific explanation       
 
> The same goes for the MoQ. It creates a new intellectual reality since
> the MoQ theory is added to that sum, but it doesn't change anything
> else.

Bah, the MOQ is no "intellectual" pattern - least not a pattern of MOQ's  
4th. level. Please use your logic! What you - like the weak interpreters 
- mean is that it is a thought - MIND - pattern and if mind is back, 
matter is back and SOM is in the driver's seat again. 

> "Gravity" and "the law of gravity" are two different things. Gravity
> is the inorganic version that has existed since the big bang. The law
> of gravity is the intellectual pattern that Newton formulated. Pirsig
> hadn't the tools he needed, the MoQ and its levels, to separate those
> two at the time he wrote ZMM.

You too my son? The difference between reality itself and what we 
think, speak, write about it is the essence of the SOM which was 
instigated by the Greeks, must we start in kindergarten? The MOQ is a 
break with SOM: REALITY IS OUR PERCEPTION OF REALITY! 
Now, this is completely whacko and I would not have touched it hadn't 
it been for the DQ/SQ constellation that makes SOM (the said 
difference between reality and the theory) the highest static GOOD. 
This way we have reality back as our abode (no longer isolated 
subjects) while we similtaneously  have the STATIC VALUE of the 
distinction at our disposal. This is having the cake and eating it 
combined.   

> And it's the same thing with Quality. It has always existed, in some
> sense even before the big bang I'd say. But the theory called MoQ is
> new.

Not according to P of ZAMM,  the Quality Reality  came to be with the 
MOQ, but now the latter-day Pirsig backs out of his own great insight 
and - like you want gravity to have been always - wants Quality to have 
been always, hence the atrocious QUALITY/MOQ meta-metaphysics 
that undermines the MOQ. The MOQ is revolution, not swirling of old 
SOM-tea around forever?

Bodvar