[MD] Experience of both the actual and the possible

[Krimel]

[Krimel]
Rather that degenerate into bits, let me address all of your issues at once.
The terminology you dismiss as a minor point is not minor at all. Quality is
fundamental to the MoQ. This is not a trivial thing and the terms you seem
comfortable with using are a source of great misunderstanding. Quality is
not in any sense conflatable with DQ. Quality is the harmony and resonance
of SQ and DQ. To miss this is to render the MoQ incoherent. Pirsig waxes so
eloquent is Lila about the virtue of DQ that he dismisses its dark chaotic
side. Pure DQ is almost always bad. When he speaks of the song that makes
him feel all runny inside, it is not the song's dynamic quality that makes
it pleasing. It is the merging of the familiar with the unfamiliar. That is
notes and rhythms (SQ) combined in a new way. The SQ and the DQ are
inseparable. What makes them appealing it's the combination of new and old;
the harmony of elements; their Quality. Quality has valence or emotional
value. SQ and DQ do not. You are right constructing a metaphysics requires
precision and if indeed Pirsig sees it your way he has failed utterly. It is
this failure to see that SQ and DQ are the Yin and Yang of the Tao that make
so much of the conversation here a waste of time, annoying even to the
lurkers.
You seem to have misunderstood my use of the terms 'eye' and 'banana' both
are nodes of signification. Fuzzy sets with tendrils reaching out to a
lifetime of usages and patterns of connection to other concepts. As phonemes
or graphemes they are meaningless sounds or images. As concepts they
harmonize remembrance and imagination in the present.


 [Krimel]
One would be better served to cross out dynamic and capitalize Quality
throughout...

[Arlo]
I usually think of "Dynamic Quality" as simply "Quality", which is why I
have no problem saying "Quality precedes both subjects and objects" (which
is, of course, says the same thing as "Dynamic Quality precedes static
quality"). Personally, I find the language of ZMM more useful in
non-metaphysical discussions and rely on it quite a bit. To extend the
analogy I was using, when you're down talking at the roots, I think ZMM's
language works because at that point, in many ways, you haven't ventured
into the metaphysical territory of trunks and leaves. (Its also why his
"Quality is the Tao" works). 

[Krimel]
Pirsig when asked about this by Paul Turner gives this off the cuff nod to
the fact that he confused the terms but rather than admit to the typos in
Lila says he supposes we could just omit Quality from the MoQ. This is
ludicrous on its face.

[Arlo]
Well, trying to construct a metaphysics requires precision, and I think ZMM
and LILA had different contexts, audiences and goals. Its also why the MOQ
doesn't use the terms "romantic quality" and "classic quality". In any
event, I think I recall seeing someone, somewhere suggest abolishing DQ/SQ
and use Q/q' (big-Q, little-q as derivative). I don't know, I don't sweat
the terminology unless it alters the meaning. 

[Krimel]
But we do have experiences (plural) and they are not experienced as unique.

[Arlo]
In the immediate flux, prior to abstraction and intellectualization, there
is no 'unique/non-unique', that is static derivative of experience. 

[Krimel]
My "eye" or DM's banana are experienced through the lens of habits of
thought.

[Arlo]
See, right there you are back in S/O logic. You've just placed 'static
quality' (both the subject and the object) as prior to 'experience'. Once
you done this, using the labels of static, dynamic and quality won't undo
the S/O damage. I get that this shift (Quality preceding both subjects and
objects) is a big one, but its at the heart of both ZMM and LILA, and I
don't think you're really understanding Pirsig if you don't get this very
significant foundational statement.

You can disagree with Pirsig, to be sure. But given that the alternative you
seem to propose (static quality existing prior to experience) is simply SOM
using Pirsig's terms, there is likely not much for me to discuss.


Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org/md/archives.html