[MF] Where is metaphysics in the MOQ?

[Kevin Perez]

He did elaborate!
  
I forgot about the pre-intellectual, time-interralated reality of the present.
  
Pirsig begins his description of Quality by saying that a relationship
between subject and object is a precursor to Quality.
  
     "I don't know how much thought passed before he arrived at this, but
     eventually he saw that Quality couldn't be independently related with
     either the subject or the object but could be found only in the
     relationship of the two with each other. It is the point at which subject
     and object meet." (ZMM, Part III)
  
Then he turns it around.  Quality is not an artifact of relationships.
Quality is an event that makes awareness of subjects and objects
possible.
  
     "[Quality] is the event at which the subject becomes aware of the
     object. And because without objects there can be no subject...
     because the objects create the subject's awareness of himself...
     Quality is the event at which awareness of both subjects and objects
     is made possible." (ZMM, Part III)
  
And he concludes by describing Quality as the "pre-intellectual,"
"time-interralated" reality of the present.
  
     "The past exists only in our memories, the future only in our plans.
     The present is our only reality. The tree that you are aware of
     intellectually, because of that small time lag, is always in the past and
     therefore is always unreal. Any intellectually conceived object is
     always in the past and therefore unreal. Reality is always the moment
     of vision before the intellectualization takes place. There is no other
     reality. This preintellectual reality is what Phædrus felt he had properly
     identified as Quality. Since all intellectually identifiable things must
     emerge from this preintellectual reality, Quality is the parent, the
     source of all subjects and objects." (ZMM, Part III)
  
But then there's Pirsig's statement, "The Metaphysics of Quality [...]
claims that all legitimate human knowledge arises from the senses or by
thinking about what the senses provide." (Lila, p. 98)
  
So, within the context of "thinking about what the senses provide," how
is one to know whether or not their "intellectually identifiable things" are
emerging from true preintellectual reality and are therefore real or whether
they are emerging from the past and are therefore unreal?
  
And I read on and find the following.
  
     "[...] if Quality or excellence is seen as the ultimate reality then it
     becomes possible for more than one set of truths to exist. Then one
     doesn't seek the absolute "Truth." One seeks instead the highest
     quality intellectual explanation of things with the knowledge that if the
     past is any guide to the future this explanation must be taken
     provisionally; as useful until something better comes along. One can
     then examine intellectual realities the same way he examines
     paintings in an art gallery, not with an effort to find out which one is
     the "real" painting, but simply to enjoy and keep those that are of
     value. There are many sets of intellectual reality in existence and we
     can perceive some to have more quality than others, but that we do so
     is, in part, the result of our history and current patterns of values."
     (Lila, p. 99)
  
And I learn that within the Metaphysics of Quality there is no certainty.
And that "Good is a noun." (Lila, p. 408)
  
And that's it.
   
  
Kevin

		
---------------------------------
Relax. Yahoo! Mail virus scanning helps detect nasty viruses!