[MD] The first division of the MOQ. - dynamic or Dynamic Quality?

[david buchanan]

David Harding said to dmb:
If Dynamic Quality truly is prior to conceptualizations and definitions isn't 'flux of life' a definition and so not Dynamic Quality?

dmb says:
I don't think "the immediate flux of life" counts a definition. DQ can't be defined but saying so does not define it. That claim only tells you what DQ is not. To say DQ is pre-conceptual or pre-verbal is just part of explaining WHY it can't be defined. 

Harding also said:
The reason why I've brought up this distinction is because it seems to me that the term dynamic is being constantly confused with something static. Movement is something which is very clearly defined. Therefore, in order to avoid all of those strange Zen intellectual paradoxes, people are taking the easy route and saying - 'Dynamic Quality is movement quality' - and sticking to their static quality.

dmb says:
I agree. Pistons going up and down is not even close to Pirsig's notion of "Dynamic". Motion is a very precisely defined physical and mechanical process. Dynamic Quality is not a thing that can be at rest nor does it have velocity. It is experience itself, an ongoing stream of continuous experience. 

Harding said:
That's why it's best to say when someone asks "What is Dynamic Quality?" "Not this, Not that."


dmb says:
I don't see how that answer could help anyone. It doesn't tell you anything at all. It's not even clear what is being negated. What is "this"? And what is "that"? DQ cannot be defined, Pirsig says, not because it's so mysterious but because it's so simple and direct. It's right under your nose all the time. It's what you know ahead of definitions. I think that little double negation is about taking the middle way through some specific dilemma wherein "this" and "that" are two rival options that are pretty well defined but people throw it around like it's the answer by which we can evade any hard question. Not saying that is your intention here, David, but I would point out that Pirsig does talk about pure Quality or DQ throughout both books and his explanations and descriptions go a helluva lot further than that little phrase ever could.