[MD] BeTteR-neSs (undefined or otherwise)

[plattholden at gmail.com]

Hi Dan,
Thanks for the kind remarks. Not only do I highly value your opinion but I 
admire and am grateful for your creating "Lila's Child," a stupendous 
undertaking which, through superior intellect and sheer grit, you brought into 
being. Those of us who benefit from your unique contribution to the evolution 
of the MOQ rarely acknowledge its influence, but it has educated me more than 
any other book I assure you. I have two copies which I refer to often, one 
marked up and other pristine.

Although politically and in some other respects at odds, we are partners in our 
appreciation of Pirsig's metaphysics and the broadening of understanding it has 
given us. Your efforts in spreading his word will enhance his influence -- a 
gift to the world.  . 

With eternal gratitude and best wishes,
Platt   


On 31 Oct 2010 at 18:23, Dan Glover wrote:

Hello everyone

On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 7:50 AM,  <plattholden at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 30 Oct 2010 at 20:13, Dan Glover wrote:
>
>> Ron:
>> Hello Dan,
>> I mean inorganic, organic, social and intellectual betterness.
>> Unless you do not think Quality and betterness have the same meaning.
>
> Dan:
> No, not in this context. You are talking about static patterns of
> value. Dynamic Quality is what's better. It is what drives static
> quality patterns towards "betterness," an undefined "somethingness"
> that isn't a thing at all. Once defined, it is gone... poof. Like a
> puffy white cloud in a clear blue summer sky... now it is here, now it
> is not. Where does it come from, and where does it go? It is a
> meaningless question. It is not a place at all. We are using
> intellectual concepts to point to that which is beyond conception. How
> can there be four when there isn't even one?
>
> Platt]
> If his past remarks are any indication Dan won't appreciate my agreeing with
> him. But, at the risk of implanting the kiss of death I say, "Right on."

Hi Platt

I do appreciate it, thank you. I know we differ on our political
outlooks as well as other things, but we are the same, deep down. We
both appreciate Quality in thought and deed. I value your opinion
highly.

>Platt:
> My answer to what is betterness is whatever improves responsivness to DQ.

Dan:
Yes I can go along with that. How do you improve your response to
Dynamic Quality, if you don't mind my asking?

Thanks again,