[MD] DMB and Me

[skutvik at online.no]

Hi Andre.
 
Mail problems or not, I have to force you to the task again. 

March 21 
 
Bodvar to Andre:
> > I have NOT equated DQ/SQ with Objective/Subjective! This is what I
> > accuse Pirsig of by introducing the Quality/MOQ "meta-metaphysics". He
> > admittedly says (in the Summary) that Quality is dynamic and the MOQ is
> > static but this is just a thin Q-guise over saying that Quality is the
> > one real (objective) reality while everything written about it is
> > something JUST or subjective.

Andre:
> Dear Bodvar, I am at a loss... because of you not seeing such a simple
> difference...and then blaming Mr. Pirsig for your misrepresentation.. I do
> not know where you get your 'thin Q-guise' from. Even less the thing about
> 'one real (objective) reality' and writng about it 'subjective'.

You are not at a loss, you are in a bend: First agreeing with me, then 
changing to DM and now unable to admit your fault without "loosing 
face" (your Chinese experience ;-)  

> This is arguing from inside your SOL postulate... and look where it is
> taking you. Sorry Bodvar, but what you write and argue is absolute
> nonsense.

I argue from MOQ's DQ/SQ premises while you try to argue from the 
impossible Quality/MOQ premises. No wonder you end up in bends, 
but - again - praise to you for not lending ear to DMB's mind-boggling 
"explanations", you seem to prefer plains-talk.   

Bodvar:
> > I couldn't agree more - this is my very point - only it's not me who do
> > this, but the latter-day Pirsig by denigrating the MOQ to be "static" -
> > totally nonsensical because it is the DQ/SQ "system""

Andre:
> And do not blame the 'latter-day Pirsig' . It's the early-day Bodvar
> who had, and still has this confused....

Not much substance in this criticism. Pirsig went from radical SOLism 
in ZAMM (where he saw SOM = intellect) to LILA that contains plenty 
SOL (see Mary's post) but enough anti for the philosophologists. Then 
"Lila's Child" as an all time low, and finally the Paul Turner letter where 
he reverses the process, but too vaguely.      

> To suggest the MoQ is Reality is totally non-sensical because it
> represents DQ/SQ as 'system' 

Newton's Gravity Theory ordered existence accordingly and now we 
are dead sure that there is such a force (not that things "longs for the 
ground" as the Greek thought. The MOQ is in a greater "league" but it 
creates the Quality Reality the same way. . 


Bodvar