[MD] Why are things called patterns?

[Andre]

Mark to Andre:
Thanks for the support.

Andre:
I am not supporting your view of Pirsig's MOQ. That should be clear.

Mark:
We get verses from the book as if they were religious dogma. This not 
where Pirsig wanted this to go.

Andre:
If you view Pirsig's MOQ as some sort of dogma then that is your 
interpretation. Interpreting it as such gives me the idea that you 
experience Pirsig's MOQ as some sort of straight-jacket, some sort of 
prison. My suggestion is that he is not doing that.
"Kant's metaphysics thrilled Phaedrus at first, but later it dragged and 
he didn't know exactly why. He thought about it and decided that maybe 
it was the Oriental experience. He had had the feeling of escape from a 
prison of intellect, and now this was just more of the prison 
again"(ZMM, p 129)

And you think Pirsig's creation of the MOQ is more of another prison?

Mark:
Please skip my well intentioned posts if they annoy you. I wish only to 
discuss this with those willing to bring in the positive.

Andre:
I have no doubt that your posts are 'well intentioned', and attempt to 
bring in 'the positive'. Problem I have is that they do not appear to 
reflect Pirsig's MOQ. Rather they reflect 'a book of your awareness'(as 
you put it in a post to Horse). If your awareness and Pirsig's MOQ 
differ fundamentally or significantly everyone on this Discuss has the 
right to point that out to you. We are here discussing Pirsig's MOQ. Not 
your awareness.

If you experience this 'pointing out' as being dogmatic then I suggest 
you misinterpret not only that intention but also the MOQ. If you 
experience the MOQ as an intellectual prison then that is a reflection 
of you. It is your projection. And no wonder: if you are convinced that 
existing in static quality patterns is no different to existing as a 
computer, then you are missing by misinterpreting  something. Something 
very fundamental.