[MD] BeTteR-neSs (undefined or otherwise)

[plattholden at gmail.com]

Hi Dan, Mark

I think your analogy is correct Mark. And like gravity, I see Dynamic Quality 
as a "natural force" as opposed to being some sort of a supernatural agent. As 
Pirsig points out, betterness can be measured by the decisions made by entities 
at all levels and especially humans every day by choosing what to buy and sell, 
not to mention whether to participate in a philosophy forum or not -- choices, 
as Mark says, among static creations. 

Platt. 

On 1 Nov 2010 at 8:14, 118 wrote:

Hi Dan,

[Dan]
Yes, exactly. Again, all we know is static quality. Dynamic Quality is
what's better. Not one thing, not four things... not a "thing" at all.
When we see something better, that is Dynamic Quality. But look for
it, and it is not there. All we see are the static quality patterns
left it its wake

[Mark]
Yes, I agree.  The same can be said for a force such as gravity.  We see
what it does, leaving solar systems in its wake.  We measure how things
interact, and we bring in a description of gravity.  It does not exist
without that which it is acting upon.  One could state that gravity created
such a phenomenon, or one could say the planets and sun create gravity, and
both are right because they coexist, or co-create.  Quality is not directly
measurable, its measurement is through the static creations.  For me, such
static creations do not contain Quality in themselves, but are defined by
Quality, which lies somehow in between two things of different quality.  As
such, we can provide it description in the same way gravity is used to
describe planetary motion.

Thanks,
Mark