[MD] DMB and Me

[skutvik at online.no]

DMB, Andre, All.

20 March.

Bo before to Andre:

> > The MOQ postulates a DQ/SQ reality, then its DQ is the Quality that has
> > spawned SQ ..OK? What the heck is the Quality of the "Quality/MOQ" meta-
> > metaphysics? 

dmb says:

> What the heck is a meta-metaphysics? Let's leave that out.

No it can't be left out, it is what has haunted the MOQ from day one. 
Pirsig "writes" the Quality Metaphysics, but then goes on to say that it 
(the MOQ) is just some static pattern of a still greater "Quality/MOQ" -
what I call - meta-metaphysics.  

> The Quality/MOQ distinction is the same thing as the DQ/sq
> distinction, except it is more specific. The Quality/MOQ distinction
> is just a result of the fact that words and concepts are static. Since
> the MOQ is composed of words and concepts, it is static too. 

What do you use to express that "words are static" if not words? To 
try to avoid language is futile, and why Pirsig's embrace of William 
James was a disaster. Even if James said that Immediate experience 
preceded subjects and objects, he meant S/O as language! Phaedrus 
had it all figured out in ZAMM with Pre-intellect/Intellect (the former to 
become DQ, the latter the static intellectual level (the subject/object 
distinction) Noting about language.     

> But "Quality" or "DQ" are terms that refer to reality that is not
> static. Those terms refer to the cutting edge of experience that is
> prior to words and concepts. There is always going to be a discrepancy
> between concepts (MOQ) and the preintellectual reality (Quality or DQ)
> because soon as you have the latter, you no longer have the former. 

Yes, DQ is the dynamic aspect - the cutting edge, immediate 
experience - if you prefer. And yes, it's prior to language (as a social 
pattern) because it's prior to all static levels, the point is that 
Quality/Concepts does NOT correspond to the DQ/SQ.   

Get it?

Bodvar