[MD] [Bulk] Re: MOQ and Completeness Theories (Sorry, Godel.)

[david buchanan]

Arlo quoted Marsha:
"In fact, when proposed that I could perhaps interpret ZMM and Lila in a way different from some, this was also met with incredulity.  Any good book has multiple interpretations, and nobody has rights to the correct interpretation."
Arlo said:
... I think a sentiment like "it's all interpretation" is readily evident. In a world where nobody has rights to the correct interpretation, please tell me how Ron's "interpretation" of Pirsig's MOQ supporting rape and torture would be dismissed?

dmb says:
I guess Marsha thinks that interpretive freedom means never having to answer any criticism. It means you don't have to worry about making sense. Imagine how much work that would save! How how lonely that would be. 
Don't you think that even the amoeba needs to "interpret" the acid rightly? Doesn't this "interpretive" capacity go all the way down so that everything exists in relation to everything else? Isn't reality just an infinite number of overlapping inter-related dialogues? The shark can't read but blood in the water has real meaning and real import and he "understands" that meaning or he dies. In the interpretation business, being wrong has real consequences. While it's not likely that anyone ever died from a bad reading of metaphysics but I think we could say that Marsha's interpretation move her TOWARD the poison of nihilism and it starves her of the new expanded rationality that Pirsig offers. 

Marsha said to Arlo:
If you want me to be Lucy, show up with 2 dozen yellow roses and take me for a ride on your Harley.  In exchange I'l moan into your ear "I'm Lucy, I'm Lucy" as long as you want.

dmb says:
Lucy is a cartoon character who tortures and undermines her little brother at every opportunity. She is a mean-spirited, small-minded, self-absorbed child. But somehow you've managed to "interpret" Lucy as something hot and sexy. How is that not just a spectacularly, conspicuously bad way to read a simple, common thing? If you can't be trusted to handle Peanuts, how much worse is it when it comes to metaphysics?