[MD] discussing Pirsig's MoQ

[118]

Hi Andre,
Thank you for the eloquent essay.  I will ignore the parts where you simply
use your post to complain about others.

Throughout Lila, Pirsig presents the idea that a metaphysics is somewhat
self-destructive.  He provides us with that thought so that we do not take
a metaphysics about Quality as being Quality.  As such, we are able to
question whether the presentation that Pirsig has provided is indeed a good
description of Quality.  This is what is meant by critical thinking.  For
example, are the levels the best form of presenting Quality?  Is the
separation into DQ and SQ clear in its presentation of Quality?

Any discussion of a metaphysics should include an analysis of the
appropriateness of such metaphysics.   First came Pirsig's Quality, then
Pirsig developed a metaphysics to explain his Quality.  I don't see much in
the way of this type of discussion.

So, I will ask the group:  Why do you think MoQ is a good description of
Quality?  You can be as specific or as oblique as you want to be, so long
as we are discussing MoQ as it pertains to Quality.

How about you Andre?  Do you want to give it a try since you want to build
on Pirsig's MoQ?  If we are to build on it, we must look for examples where
MoQ could be strengthened such that it would better describe Quality.

Thanks,
Mark

On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 1:05 PM, Andre Broersen <andrebroersen at gmail.com>wrote:

> Dear MoQ'ers,
>
> I have created this new thread simply to vent some of my frustrations and
> I hope that Horse will forgive my language that I am going to use sometimes.
>
> This discuss is becoming de-motivating to me. Here I was, in the early
> days (for me around 2008) hoping to talk about Pirsig's MoQ. Then, from
> post one, I was confronted/met/welcomed by Bodvar who suggested that Pirsig
> was all wrong about his own metaphysics. This...with a little help from my
> frinds, I survived. Platt, with his reasoning which bordered on fascism)
> and Bodvar are off this discuss...thank goodness but there are a few left
> whom I really wish will follow these aforementioned two.
>
> We have all been invited to a very special space called the MoQ. I really
> think this is a priviledged space to be in. I, until some years back had an
> inkling of such a space but had no idea how to 'get' there (intellectually)
> nor what to expect once inside. I only had an intuition, a strong feeling
> that, what Pirsig had opened up and had made available in a mystic and at
> the same time tangible, metaphysical way somehow resonated with me.
>
> ZMM and LILA were and still are that chamber, that refuge, that opening
> and intellectual power with which to make sense of this world. I really do
> believe that the Quality paradigm, as part of the perennial philosophy will
> improve this world. But some things are hard to break. A SOM perspective
> for sure. And there  a few on this discuss that do nothing else but
> undermine, de-construct and absolutely nullify what Pirsig has tried, over
> a period of 15 years to create...simply because it does not match their
> own, as they term it 'experience'.
>
> Sad really. Lets name some names (but remember these are static patterns
> of quality they 'personify', same as Lila at the biological level and Rigel
> at the social level).
>
> First comes to mind is Marsha. She has been invited to this space Pirsig
> has created and she does nothing else but critisize it and attempts to
> break it down. She holds the space (Pirsig's MoQ) as
> questionable/hypothetical/**doubtful and 'mere opinion'.
>
> The space she has voluntarily entered, she ramms down,severely criticises
> and even has the audacity to question the validity of, is hereby
> continually under siege. Can you imagine that? If I understand the
> literature clearly she is representing the post-modernist,
> deconstructionist philosophy ( a lethal device already severely criticised).
> Dmb and myself have been trying to point out that this is a space you can
> enter via a certain skillful manipulation of symbols (as Pirsig defines the
> intellectual level) yet Marsha apparently lacks the skills as well as the
> manipulation and most certainly has the symbols all wrong. As with Joe and
> Mark and a few others who occassionally appear on this list.
>
> I really do not know how many people are lurking but I do know that, if I
> were interested in discussing Pirsig's MoQ...you know, simply asking
> questions about fragments from ZMM and/or LILA for clarification, I would
> think that this is NOT the place to ask. Posters like Marsh and Mark and
> Joe, and Michael, and John and Ham... holy macaronies...what hope do they
> have to get something useful i.e. quality inspired.
>
> I feel that participating in this discuss we (all of the participants)
> have an obligation to honour, respect and further/build on, Pirsig's space
> he has created for all of us. This does not mean following dogma, this does
> not mean adhering to 'Pirsig's word'. Nothing wrong with attempting to
> place our own bit of furniture or painting or frying utensil into this
> space BUT!! I reject those that are trying (the Marsha's, the Mark's , the
> Joe's ( sorry mate), the John's, the Ham's) to reconstruct the space
> itself! That is what pisses me off about the current level of discussion on
> this discuss.
>
> I find it highly demotivating and am seriously contemplating unsubscribing.
>
> All those who think that E=MC2 is anything other than an intellectual
> pattern of value (regardless of whether Pirsig thinks so or Andre), all
> those who think that fascism grew out of socialism, all those who think
> that do/re/mi/fa/sol/ is the be all and end all of the universe...please go
> away. You have made this place a 'den of thieves'. You are, what in lovely
> english is termed 'gatebashers'.
>
> I hereby devote my deep respect for R.M. Pirsig. He is way ahead of his
> time. Pity so few of us understand the finger he is raising...for too many
> do not see, feel, hear or know whereto.
>
> Peace.
>
>
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/**listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-**moqtalk.org<http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org>
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/**pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.**org/<http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/>
> http://moq.org/md/archives.**html <http://moq.org/md/archives.html>
>