[MD] Step Two

[Ant McWatt]

Jan,

The link for the updated paper by Eric Preizkalns & myself is now:

http://moq.robertpirsig.org/MOQTime.html


Jan Anders said to DMB, Aug 25th 2014:

I began this thread about step one, two, three, the steps of the 4 
levels of MOQ with Anthony McWatt and Eric Priezkaln's little essay 'The
 Role of Evolution, Time and Order in Robert Pirsig's "Metaphysics of 
Quality”.' Anthony issued a revised version called "The MOQ and Time" 
recently but I can’t find it on the web just now. This little essay also
 hold some responses from RMP so I think you should have it in your 
library.


Ant McWatt comments:

I noticed in the late 1990s that (probably) the largest gap that remained then regarding Pirsig's metaphysical work, was any in-depth look at the concept of time.  It meant that Pirsig, Eric (who remember is quite a logical positivist in his "philosophical outlook"!) and myself had to basically start from scratch with the topic...  Anyway, Jan-Anders is correct; most, if not all, quotes by Pirsig in that paper are therefore unique to it (though it did eventually become the Appendix for the Ph.D).

Either way, it's good to see this paper being used (appropriately!) as a starting point.

Best wishes,

Ant


Jan Anders said to DMB, Aug 25th 2014:

------------CUT------------

My quest is based on two points:

The diagram on page 4 which shows how static patterns of quality are 
divided into four systems. The treshold, where a step into a new level 
evolves, is located at the left of each field-level.

On 
page 7 RMP wrote to Ant: "The MOQ starts with the source of 
undifferentiated perception itself as the ultimate reality. The very 
first differentiation is probably ‘change’. The second one may be 
‘before and after’. From this sense of ‘before and after’ emerge more 
complex concepts of time.” Step zero is that start.
>
> And from Lila of course.

> I am curious about every little detail in this figure. What are the details in this 4 levels. I want to know and I can see that misconceptions about the levels are causing some trouble and miscomfort here and there. I think it would be useful to master this little issue. A romantic prefer what it is today, a classic will be more into how it works and the eternal mechanisms behind.

> So about my book. If you are not interested in reading it is ok for me. I’ll just give a short brief about its background anyway.
>
> The novel is really about money and the art of losing control! But if you aren’t interested in money and rather want to keep control, don’t read it. Do never crack up or fall in love. Stay away from accidentual experiences even if it could be of dynamic quality. I wrote that book because the story sort of went up in my mind. It’s mostly fiction but I had some inspiration from ZAMM and Lila. I have also a lot of inspiration from other sources too. I was travelling around a lot in my car and all the pieces in the jig-saw puzzle fell together eventually so it took me just one month to write it down. There was a lot of yellow notes floating around in my mind that had to be put in order.


------------CUT------------


> The story takes some effort to read in the beginning because my plan, the structure, was to make it like a circular movement, uphill, hard and sweaty until you reach the top from where the roller coaster goes down again. I’ve been working on roofs of buildings for many years so I know how hard it is to walk up until you can enjoy the perspective. My intention was that from the top in chapter 7 and further on it mostly would be fun to read. It was fun to write too.
>
> It’s free on Itunes bookstore, you can also buy it as paperback here: https://www.createspace.com/3895126 


------------CUT------------


.