[MD] On the Development of, and the Functions of MoQ

[Andre Broersen]

Mark to Arlo:

Let me start with an analogy.  What I perceive as the attitude of your post can be compared to the Buddhist concept of "clinging".  Buddhist thought seeks to dispel this static supremacy with the ideas of change and co-arising nature of existence.  In my view, the inherent premise of MoQ being one towards "betterness" does the same thing.  It is often difficult to adapt to the view which MoQ presents, and one must relieve oneself from typical Western appraisals of What IS.

Andre:
So says Mark, the self styled pontificate. Mark, you want so much to transform, change, reverse (!) and move-on from Pirsig's MoQ that you are questioning Anthony's answers to you, claiming he doesnt understand Quality properly (what the heck is there to 'understand' about Quality?), he misrepresents Ham, what does Anthony know about the MOQ anyway and, the most outrageous of all: what does Pirsig know about Quality anyway???

You are presenting, in your flight from the MoQ (because it is static and therefore already stale and redundant and degenerate in your eyes) a path which everyone should take, under the misleading guise of 'thinking for yourself' (you suggested that Anthony doesn't even do that) and to get away from Pirsig's MoQ is the best way to ensure the best quality suggestions and answers. And what do I see in your posts, in which you present yourself as arrogantly condescending once again? Bullshit...nothing but confusing (SOM-based) bullshit.

This is really embarrassing. (and please Mark, do not ask me where you are confused...to, as you Uria Heep-like, help you...) .I would not even know where to start. YOU are confused about EVERYTHING to do with Pirsig's MoQ....the 'development' and functions of the MoQ...pfffffffffffffffff (that is the sound of a deflating hot air balloon Mark!)

I am not interested in YOUR MoQ. I am interested in Pirsig's MoQ. I have said this before. Since you suggest that Pirsig's MoQ should be abandoned (the scriptural dogmatic doctrine as you imply) and instead you advocate the bull that you, or Marsha for that matter, keep on spouting here, then I really am on the wrong discuss.

And now I will relieve myself and wish a very hearty cheers to all.
André