[MF] What are people?

[Kevin Perez]

      Excellent post Ted.  Great questions.  I'm no MOQ expert either.
   
  The way I see it, the Metaphysics of Quality, as delineated by Pirsig, does not ignore
  the reality of subjects and objects.  The difference between the Metaphysics of
  Quality and a Subject/Object Metaphysics is primarily in their relationship to reality.
  The MOQ says the ultimate reality is quality and that everything else stems from it.
  The SOM says the ultimate reality is a duality of subjects and objects and that
  everything else stems from them.  Quality, in a SOM, is either a state of mind
  (subject) or a physical entity (object).
   
  
  Pirsig's books continue to fascinate me - I'm currently re-reading ZMM - which is why
  I've chosen to participate in this forum.  I want to learn more about Pirsig's MOQ.  But
  I'm a theist, which is why I suppose relationships interest me so much (and vice
  versa) and why I'm questioning Pirsig's claim that "man is always the measure of all
  things."  To a lesser degree and to the extent that I believe man is a co-creator I'm
  also questioning Pirsig's claim that "man is the not the source of all things."  Where
  these questions will lead, I'll have to wait and see.
  
   
  In my current read of ZMM I'm intentionally looking for relationships and the quality of
  those relationships.  It's amazing.  From this perspective, the material takes on an
  entirely new flavor.  I recommend doing this.
  
   
  I said, "relationships are the measure of all things."  I'm not exactly sure what this
  change would mean to the MOQ.  But it helps provide me with a better understanding
  of the temporal nature of quality (e.g., two steps forward, one step back kind of
  events) and quality in terms of man's role as a co-creator of quality (e.g., in ZMM, on
  DeWeese's open porch deck, the impasse created by John's comment, "you must
  have been really crazy, I mean really nuts to leave this place").  In the example of the
  mechanic who used a hammer and cold chisel to remove tappet covers, if the
  experience led the mechanic to a greater appreciation of quality in his work then
  within this greater context we may conclude that Pirsig's damaged motorcycle and
  his negative opinion of the mechanic were a small price to pay for the mechanic's
  education.  In the example of John's sarcastic remark, it was the relationship
  between Sutherland and DeWeese that was the basis, the measure, of the quality of
  the remark...for DeWeese.  But because Pirsig's relationship with Sutherland was on
  a completely different level, the same remark was judged harmless by Pirsig.
  
   
  Any thoughts?
  
   
   
  Kevin
  
   
  PS:  Please be cognizant of the subject line.  We may be moving to a new topic.




			
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Photos
 Ring in the New Year with Photo Calendars. Add photos, events, holidays, whatever.