[MD] A problem with the MOQ.

[Andre]

Tuukka to Anthony:

But the Dynamic-static division is not ruined it we add the classic-romantic division as a
subdivision of the static. That addition is irrelevant for the purposes of explaining American Indian mysticism, but it's relevant for discussing other things, such as the hip and square personality types.

Andre:
Hi Tuukka and Anthony, if I may join in for a minute. I think the DQ/sq division is an improvement on the classic/romantic division. Static quality does not divide into classic/romantic precisely because of the DQ reference. In this case the (American Indian) mysticism. This 'mysticism' part adds greater understanding to the static evolutions that are occurring.

As Pirsig explains: "...[what] the American Indian seeks is not a romantic understanding of the surface beauty of the world. Neither is it a vision of the world's classic intellectual form. It is something else"(LILA, p 112)

This understanding led Phaedrus to the example of the Zuni in Ruth Benedict's "Patterns of Culture". And I think that, as Phaedrus says, "This was not just a tribal [also read Western cultural i.e classic/romantic division thing] incident going on here. This was something of universal importance happening. This was EVERY MAN.". (ibid, p 114)

Notice the emphasis here: Phaedrus contrasts 'tribal' consciousness with 'universal' consciousness. The latter is a more inclusive understanding.

In classical/wisdom-tradition terms this is called a 'transcendence' in understanding. When you reach an understanding that goes beyond but INCLUDES one's previous understanding. It includes your previous understanding but enriches it with your 'higher' one thereby finding that the classical and the romantic understandings are never to be understood in exactly the same way again because of this higher understanding.

That's why, should you maintain classic and romantic 'as subdivisions' of static quality you WILL ruin it...because of their 'regressive' nature. It is not the same because static quality IS MORE INCLUSIVE and therefore of higher quality than classic-romantic. Imho.

And, may I add, it suggests something more to one's 'personality' than just the 'hip' and 'square' 'types'. Time to move on from ethnocentrism to globalism?

Andre