[MD] spanner in the works

[John Carl]

Bo???

Just happened to come across it in the archives.
Ladies and gents, The late, great  Paul Turner:

---------

Paul: No, at least, that's not how Pirsig saw it:

"Man is the measure of all things." Yes, that's what he is saying about
Quality. Man is not the source of all things, as the subjective idealists
would say. Nor is he the passive observer of all things, as the objective
idealists and materialists would say. The Quality which creates the world
emerges as a relationship between man and his experience." [ZMM, p383]

As you keep reminding us, S/O was a distinction that didn't exist when the
Sophists were teaching - so it seems an odd move to pin idealism on them.
These Sophists could turn out to be a real spanner in the works for the
SOL.
Interesting.

Regards

Paul
--------------

John:

Heh-heh.  And if you think _dead_ sophists are a problem...


But  here's where your really big problem is Bo, as I've been trying to
explain -

(Bo's response to Paul)

About SOM not leaping ready-made into existence is no great
thing (why Matt repeatedly hits the roof over this is beyond me)
Pirsig describes SOM as having its start with the search for
immortal principles. With Parmenides a milestone was reached
(ZMM page 366)

    "It's here that the classic mind for the first time took leave
    of its romantic origin

(Classic=intellect in the diagram and if so Romantic=society)


--------



John:

Catch it Bo?  You put the romantic at the social level.  Tsk Tsk.  Very
inapt.  Pirsig makes the opposite point, in Lila, I believe.  Making the SQ
fall into a classic/romantic dichotomy.  You assign the Romantic to the
wrong level!

I guess because you're an artist, and don't think about what you do as
thinking.

Silly Bo.  You're being too self-denigrating, after all.  And here
everybody's accusing you of self-aggrandizement.

Tsk tsk indeed.

Paul didn't catch that particular error, but he well defined your overall
problem:

Paul:

 But if the Sophists were part of the emergence of the intellectual
level - as you now accept - and if they held a position which is contrasted,

by Pirsig at least, with the emerging subjective/objective dichotomy of
Plato, then what can we conclude? Either you accept what most of us have
been saying all along - that the intellectual level is not identical with
SOM - or be forced to conclude that your mysterious proto-fifth-level
emerged at the same time as the intellectual level. Your only other option
is to reject Pirsig's description of the Sophists' position with respect to
S/O whilst accepting the rest of his description of this period. This means
your "unearthing of the true MOQ" has started to erode the validity of ZMM
as well as everything else. You'll be down to one paragraph soon!

-------------------

John:

"Down to one paragraph soon"?    Better make it a good one then.