[MD] The hard question.

[ARLO JAMES BENSINGER JR]

[Mark]
There is some comfort to know that what we think of as MoQ today will be completely different at some time.

[Arlo]
This is a very odd thing to say. Typically I see two uses of the MOQ here (as I've said before), one being "Pirsig's ideas" (e.g. like "James' ideas") and the other being "the school of ideas that share a general foundation" (e.g. like "pragmatism"). Your use above is odd using either of these.

It is odd to suggest that we think of as "Pirsig's ideas" will be completely different at some latter time, unless the implication is now that we are generally confused. This would be another way of saying, "we will learn that what he meant is different than what we think it is now". I see no evidence of this, as his involvement with Ant and others suggest that they do understand his ideas correctly. (Unless you're advancing a form a deconstructionist thinking)

And to the second, it is equally odd to suggest that what we mean by "pragmatism" will mean something completely different tomorrow than it does today. What explanatory power would such a term even have? "We used to believe that Idealism asserted that reality is fundamentally 'in the mind', now we believe that Idealism asserts reality exists independently of observers." In this case, ideas don't change, but we call James an Idealist because we decided that Idealism should mean something entirely different than it has.

So tell me, if you use "the MOQ" in a way that neither means "Pirsig's ideas" or "a category of metaphysics", how do you mean it?

BTW, if you said, "what we think of as metaphysically good today will be completely different, better, at some time", then hey I agree. Or even "what we think of as a good MoQ today (Pirsig's ideas) will be replaced by a better MOQ (Jane Doe's ideas built from the same DQ/SQ primary division but different from Pirsig's) at some time", then hey, I agree. (Just as many believe that Peirce's 'pragmaticism' was superior to other pragmatic philosophies. But note, neither "Peirce's ideas" nor the general understanding of the categorical 'pragmatism' is 'completely different'.)