[MD] How to Understand the MOQ

[Steven Peterson]

Hi Platt,

Platt said:

 As Pirsig observed at the beginning of LIla,
>
> "Don't do it. You'll get into nothing but trouble. You're just going to start
> up a thousand dumb arguments about something that was perfectly clear until you
> came along. You're going to make ten thousand opponents and zero friends
> because the moment you open your mouth to say one thing about the nature of
> reality you automatically have a whole set of enemies who've already said
> reality is something else." (Lila, 5)
>
> So what's to be gained? Once in awhile somebody says something that
> illuminates. Those moments are worth the time spent. For the rest, enjoy. If I
> didn't find this site fun, and occasionally enriching, I would have left long
> ago.

Steve:
I think this is a good answer, Platt. But note the diminished
expectations from John's hope for changing the world to your hope for
occasional enrichment. I think that is all we can expect.

Will the MOQ ever gain a popular static latch? It seems very doubtful
to me, but I think Pirsig is part of a broad and diverse attack on SOM
that runs from Hegel and Heidegger to existentialism and hermeneutics
in Europe and from Pierce, James, and Dewey to Davidson and Rorty in
the US. Whether or not the MOQ ever gains broad appeal, SOM has been
and will likely continue to be on the decline.

Best,
Steve