[MD] Definitions.

[ARLO JAMES BENSINGER JR]

[Dave to DMB]
Because if "static patterns of value" or "deductions" change, it is misleading or confusing to "characterized [them] by a fixed or stationary condition", "static."  Additionally it is Pirsig's error not Marsha's.

[Arlo]
Apart from people trapped inside "Intellect=SOM", I don't think there is anyone who is confused or feels misled by the terms "static" or "stable". And I don't think, apart from this small group, anyone worries that 'static' or 'stable' means 'fixed' or 'stationary' or 'unchanging'. These are characterizations made by an S/O absolutism. "Stable" means stable, it doesn't need a paragraph of antonyms to rescue it from SOM. And these errors are Marsha's (and apparently yours), not Pirsig's or DMB's.

"Stable pattern" is redundant, but it draws emphasis to the primary salient characteristic of a 'pattern'; persistence (or stability, or staticness, etc.). In fact, a pattern that was truly "ever changing" would not even *be* a pattern, and by definition would not exist.