[MD] refreshment

[John Carl]

"So It has really been a shock to see how close Bradley is to the MOQ. Both
he and the MOQ are expressing what Aldous Huxley called "The Perennial
Philosophy," which is perennial, I believe, because it happens to be true.

 Bradley has given an excellent description of what the MOQ calls Dynamic
Quality and an excellent rational justification for its intellectual
acceptance.

 It and the MOQ can be spliced together with no difficulty into a broader
explanation of the same thing.

A singular difference is that the MOQ says the Absolute is of value, a point
Bradley may have thought so obvious it didn't need mentioning.

The MOQ says that this value is not a property of the Absolute, it is the
Absolute itself, and is a much better name for the Absolute than "Absolute."


Pirsig, Last Words in the Copleston Annotations, showing that DQ is an
Absolute but with a different connotation.


However, James dismisses Bradley's Absolute in the same way he dismisses
Royce's. Therefore, Pirsig's  identification of Value/ DQ with that Absolute
as I've been claiming all along, refutes dmb completely.

He's just too dmb to see it.